Routine Testing Practices and the Linguistic Construction of Knowledge

Author(s): Deborah Poole

Source: Cognition and Instruction, Vol. 12, No. 2 (1994), pp. 125-150
Published by: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (Taylor & Francis Group)
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3233678
Accessed: 31/08/2008 21:31
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=lebtaylorfrancis.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

http://www.jstor.org

ANDINSTRUCTION,
COGNITION
1994,12(2),125-150
Inc.
Associates,
Erlbaum
Copyright
? 1994,Lawrence

RoutineTestingPracticesand the
LinguisticConstructionof Knowledge
Deborah Poole
San Diego State University

This articleexaminesthe linguisticencodingof curricular

knowledgein routine
datacollectedin a qualitative
classroomtestingevents.Focusingon transcript
study
of juniorhigh school socialstudiesclassrooms,I arguethatthe dominantepisteof testingeventsis positivisticandvaluesa discrete,bounded
mologicalorientation
formof knowledge.The analysiscenterson the languageof reviewactivitiesthat
typicallyprecedeandfollowclassroomtests;specifically,it focuseson interactional
sequencesthat demandstudents'verbalparticipationin a culturallyspecified
orientationto knowledge.A comparisonof the languageof these testingevents
of the samecurricular
information
and earlierlesson presentations
suggeststhat
testingencouragesand exaggeratesthe extent to which a positivisticview of
knowledgeprevails.
High-status knowledge appearsto be discrete knowledge. It has . . . identifiable
content and . . . stable structurethat are both teachable and, what is critically

testable.(Apple,1990)
important,
In addressingthe interface between ideology and school curriculum,a number
of scholars have noted that the knowledge that typically counts in the school
setting can be characterizedas positivistic (Apple, 1990; Giroux, 1981), technical
(Apple, 1990; McClaren,1989), componentialor bounded(Freire, 1970; Giroux,
1981; McClaren,1989; Woods, 1979; cf. P. Berger, B. Berger, & Kellner, 1973;
R. Scollon & S. Scollon, 1981). In these interpretations,school-valuedknowledge
is that which can be objectified into discrete and measurableunits of information
seemingly free of affective or value-laden dimensions. Giroux (1981), for
example, argued that curricular knowledge as typically constituted in U.S.
education reflects a "cultureof positivism":

Requests for reprints should be sent to Deborah Poole, Departmentof Linguistics & Oriental
Languages, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA 92182.

126

POOLE

its position
Thecentralassumption
by whichthe cultureof positivismrationalizes
of valuesfrom
on theoryandknowledgeis thenotionof objectivity,theseparation
knowledgeandmethodological
inquiryalike.(p. 44)
The way classroomteachersview knowledge,the way knowledgeis mediated
andtheway studentsaretaughtto view
throughspecificclassroommethodologies,
structure
classroom
knowledge,
experiencesin a way thatis consistentwith the
principlesof positivism.
In thisview,knowledgeis objective,"bounded
and'outthere'"(Woods,1979,
p. 137).Classroomknowledgeis oftentreatedas anexternalbodyof information,
of humanbeings.Fromthis
the productionof whichappearsto be independent
is
of time andplace;it
viewed
as
independent
perspective,objectiveknowledge
becomesuniversalized,ahistoricalknowledge.Moreover,it is expressedin a
languagethat is basicallytechnicaland allegedlyvalue free. This languageis
instrumental
and definesknowledgein termsthatare empiricallyverifiableand
suitedto findingthebestpossiblemeansforgoalsthatgo unquestioned.
Knowledge,
it alsobecomesimpersonal.
then,becomesnotonlycountableandmeasurable,
(pp.
52-53; cf. R. Scollon& S. Scollon,1981,p. 49)
This articleis concernedwith specifying the linguistic means throughwhich this
view of knowledge is constitutedin ordinaryclassrooms.Specifically, it investigates the constructionof positivistic, objective, or technical knowledge in the
interactionalsequencesof routinetestingpractices,proposingthattestingactivities
evoke a positivistic display of school knowledge andencourageconditionsunder
which such a perspectiveprevails.In focusing on the languageof testing,the study
assumesthatthe dominantform of school knowledge is initiallyconstitutedin the
minimal contexts of classroom interaction(cf. Mehan, 1973, 1978; Mehan &
Wood, 1976). In other words, students learn and appropriateschool-valued
knowledge throughlocally managed,routine school acts. This approachseeks to
locate the positivistic knowledge referredto by Giroux (1981) and other critical
pedagogists, as well as to identify the interactionalmeans throughwhich it is
socialized and maintained.
Previous interaction-based studies of testing have focused largely on
standardizedintelligenceor achievementtests (e.g., Cicourelet al., 1974;Marlaire
& Maynard, 1990; Mehan, 1973, 1978). This body of research has elucidated
the kinds of face-to-face encountersconstitutiveof standardizedtesting practices
and has investigatedthe knowledge dimension of testing from several perspectives, each largely congruent with the findings discussed here. Several studies
have documented, for example, that neither the testing environment nor the
resulting grade take into account the complexity of students' knowledge or
reasoningprocesses (MacKay, 1974; Mehan, 1973, 1978; Roth, 1974). MacKay,
in particular,argued that the production of gradable, objective answers in
standardizedtesting arbitrarilylimits display of the knowledge studentspossess,
so that a test often becomes a "trivialtest of vocabulary"(p. 238) in which an

OF KNOWLEDGE
TESTINGANDTHECONSTRUCTION

127

epistemology of "knowledge as puzzles" or "guessing game" (p. 236) prevails.

The concernraisedby MacKayandothersis thata test score neverthelessbecomes
an institutionalfact that purportsto representstudent knowledge and frequently
forms the basis for subsequenteducationaldecision making.

CLASSROOMTESTINGPRACTICES
The presentanalysisfollows from this workby focusing on the linguisticconstruction of knowledgein the environmentof classroomtesting.Here testingpractices
are taken to mean the sorts of weekly to biweekly classroomtests constructedby
the teacheror textbook publisher,ratherthan the standardizedachievementtests
more generallyconsideredthe properdomainof testing. Classroomtesting is a far
more frequentexperience in the lives of schoolgoers and thus representsa more
pervasivecontextfor the socializationof school-valuedknowledge.The classroom
test also has long-term consequences in the form of recorded grades whose
cumulative effects are seen both in periodic reports and ultimately in students'
futureacademicchoices.
In the classes observed for this study, routine tests were generally part of a
three-prongedsequenceof events: (a) a review of curricularcontentin preparation
for the test (hereafterreferredto as the pretest review), (b) the test itself, and (c)
the returnandreview of correctedtests (hereaftercalled the posttest review).This
sequence constitutesa final boundaryto a sequentialunit of classroom work and
representsa set of key activities (Hymes, 1962) for investigatingwhat kind of
knowledgemasteryconstitutesschool success. Eachsuccessive event in the testing
sequence constitutes a re-presentationof curricularinformationthrough which
previouscontentpresentationsaredistilledto a displayof whatcountsas successful
school learning. The pretest and posttest reviews are an emphatic display of
school-valuedknowledge because they representverbalreiterations(or pre-iterations) of actual test items and highlight teacherperceptionsof critical curricular
information.In the discussion to follow, analysis centers largely on these review
events, focusing on the kinds of question-answersequencesthat demandstudent
participationin the overt constructionof a culturalview of knowledge.

SOCIALIZATION
LANGUAGE
Schieffelin and Ochs's (1986a; Ochs & Schieffelin, 1984) recent articulationof
language socialization provides a motivating theoreticalframeworkfor investigating the social constructionof knowledge in the school setting. In their view,
language forms and practices representa pervasive but implicit means through
which cultural knowledge is conveyed to novices. Linguistic features and the
sequential organizations within which they occur are seen to encode "socio-

128

POOLE

culturalinformation
on acts andactivities,identitiesandrelationships,
feelings
and beliefs and otherdomains[that]must be inferredby childrenand other
novices"(Ochs,1987,p. 10).1
Ochs's(1984, 1988)studyof clarification
stylesamongSamoanandmiddleclass U.S. caregiversprovidesa compellingexampleof this kindof inferential
the relationbetweencaregiver
languagesocialization.This studydemonstrates
discoursepracticesandepistemological
stancesin the two settings.2She argued
thatin WesternSamoa,thereis a dispreference
for speculatingas to the mental
states of others,a domainbeyond the limits of what one can know. Ochs
howSamoancaregivers
donotexpandorguessthemeaningof young
demonstrated
children'sunclearutterances.
Instead,they ask for repetition.This interactional
as a meansof socializingnovicesintotheknowledgethat
patternwas interpreted
This is the
the mentalstatesof othersarenot appropriate
objectsof conjecture.
forwhomaprimary
modeof clarification
converseof middle-class
U.S.caregivers,
to the
withchildrenis theexpansionor "expressed
guess,"a modecorresponding
commonU.S. practiceof guessingwhatothersarethinking.
The presentstudyfollows fromlanguagesocializationresearchin focusing
on a minimalinteractional
sequencethroughwhichnovicesare socializedto a
particularepistemologicalstance. Here the objects of investigationare the
question-answersequencesthat typify tests and test-relatedevents. These
in theactivitiesunderinvestigation
and,I argue,represent
sequencespredominate
instantiations
of
a
view
of
symbolic
knowledge.3
positivistic
DATACOLLECTION
The datafor the studywere gatheredin threepublicjuniorhigh schools in a
largeurbanareaof southernCalifornia.Thisregionof the schooldistrictserves
'The discourse orientationof this model of languagesocializationcontrastswith the grammatical
focus of the Sapir-Whorfhypothesis. Schieffelin and Ochs (1986a) proposedthat"It is time to shake
the dust off of the original Sapir-Whorf hypothesis [and] rid it of its extreme deterministic
interpretations"
(p. 169; cf. Ochs, 1984; R. Scollon & S. Scollon, 1981). In their view, languageand
culture are in dynamic relation, with interactionalways implying the possibility of culturalchange.
Furthermore,novices are seen as active contributorsto the socializationprocess who can affect and
alter culturalpatterns.
20chs also tied the respectiveclarificationstyles of the Samoan and middle-classU.S. caregivers
to a wide range of culturalphenomena,such as whether experts typically accommodateto novices
(as middle-class U.S. caregivers do) or the reverse.
3Thedefinitionof socializationassumedhere (and in the Ochs and Schieffelin, 1984, framework)
is takenfrom Wentworth's(1980) model of socializationas "anactual interactionaldisplayof the socioculturalenvironment"(p. 68): "Thatmodel directs inquiry toward the interactionthat constitutes
socialization, ratherthancontinuingto encourageattentionto the psychologicaloutcomesof the process" (p. 83, italics added). In other words, the issue here is not the extent to which novices internalize
the culturalnormsand values throughwhich the school operatesbut the constitutionof those cultural
norms and values as displayed throughinteractionalsequences of test-relatedevents.

TESTING AND THE CONSTRUCTIONOF KNOWLEDGE

129

a predominantlyworking-classLatinopopulationthathas been establishedin the

areafor several generations.In one of the schools, studentswere bussed in from
the greatermetropolitanareafor a math-science"magnet"program,but otherwise
studentsin the classes observedwere residentsof the surroundingneighborhoods.
In this district, the administrationhad mandatedthat each student be given a
minimumof two grades per week for each class attended,a policy that seemed
to encourage the kind of testing events analyzed here.
Two eighth-gradeU.S. history teachers, Mrs. Wells4 and Mr. Chavez, and
one seventh-gradegeographyteacher,Mr. Grey, participatedin the study. Over
the course of the study, I observed approximately50 class hours, 39 of which
were audiotapedand/or videotaped. In addition, the study included numerous
informaldiscussions with each teacher as well as more structuredinterviews at
the end of the data-collectionperiod.The primaryperiodof data collection lasted
from Januaryto May of 1988 and was precededby a pilot study duringJanuary
and Februaryof 1987 in two of Mrs. Wells's eighth-gradeU.S. history classes.
The following year, I observed classes of all three teachers, focusing on one or
two class periods with each.
The data selected for this analysis include transcriptsof two pretest reviews,
six posttest reviews, and the written tests from which each derives. The data
were transcribed using a modified form of standard conversation-analytic
conventions, listed in AppendixA. Each teacherconductedpretest reviews as a
means of preparingstudents immediatelyprior to a test and posttest reviews as
a means of going over test answers to allow students to review what they had
missed. The originalstudy focused solely on the posttestreview and the attendant
written texts. Hence, the data of the pretest reviews are less extensive. Two
pretestreviews are includedhere,however,becausethe interactionthatconstitutes
them resembles so closely thatof the posttest activities (see Example I to follow
shortly). Informationrelevant to the eight test review (TR) events is listed in
Table 1; the tests themselves are found in Appendix B.
With the exception of TR-3 (a posttest review of a quiz on the U.S.
Constitution),each event in the corpusreviews the same test as at least one other.
TR-1 and TR-2 are the prereview and postreview of the same test (Test I in
Appendix B), focused on a textbook chapter entitled "The Constitution'sFirst
Test" (Ver Steeg, 1982). The same is true of TR-4 and TR-5, which are the
prereview and postreview of a test covering U.S. life in the 1920s, the Great
Depression, and the New Deal. TR-6 also reviews this same test, but with a
differentclass. TR-7 and TR-8, posttest reviews of a single test with classes of
two differenttracks,derive from a text unit entitled"AfricaSouth of the Sahara"
(Kolevzon & Heine, 1977).
*Thenames of participatingteachersare pseudonyms.Students' names have been abbreviatedto
preserveanonymity.

130

POOLE
TABLE1
Test Review (TR)Data Base

TR Event

Teacher

Grade

Subject

Time of Review

TR-1
TR-2
TR-3
TR-4
TR-5
TR-6
TR-7
TR-8

Wells
Wells
Wells
Chavez
Chavez
Chavez
Grey
Grey

8
8
8
8
8
8
7
7

U.S. history
U.S. history
U.S. history
U.S. history
U.S. history
U.S. history
World geography
World geography

Pretest
Posttest
Posttest
Pretest
Posttest
Posttest
Posttest
Posttest

AS A LOCUS
CO-CONSTRUCTED
PROPOSITIONS
OF SCHOOLKNOWLEDGE
The review events of this corpus resemble other classroom activities in terms of
hierarchical and sequential organization (cf. Mehan, 1979a). Each event is
explicitly framedthroughan opening statement(e.g., "OK,I wannago over some
things I want you to know for the test tomorrow"in a pretestreview or "Now
we're going to go over your test" in a posttest review); ratified curriculartalk
is segmented into a series of topically related sets (Mehan, 1979a) or topic
sequences; and topic sequences in turn are overwhelmingly composed of
initiation-reply-evaluation(IRE) sequences, the widely documentedunmarked
sequence of classroom interaction(Griffin & Humphrey, 1978; Lemke, 1990;
Mehan, 1979a; Poole, 1990; Sinclair & Coulthard,1975).
In the events of this corpus, the linguistic encoding of curricularcontent is
largely confined to IRE sequences that take the form of "test-questions"or
incompletesentence frames.Of the 77 topic sequences in the corpus,only 5 take
a more extendedform thatdoes not rely on the test-question-basedIRE sequence.
Elsewhere (Poole, 1989) I have discussed these extended sequences and the
reasons they occur. The focus here, however, is on IRE sequences, which
representthe dominantmode of presentation.
A test-question,also termeda display or known-informationquestion(Long &
Sato, 1983; Mehan, 1979b),is used here in its discoursesense to meanthe familiar
asymmetricalsequence in which the expert asks a question to which he or she
alreadyhas an answerin mind (e.g., "Whatcolor is that?""Where'syour nose?").
An incomplete sentence frame ("Maryhad a little
") representsa syntactic
variationof this form.A uniquecharacteristicof test review activitiessuchas those
representedin this corpus is that the verbal test-questionsadditionallyrepresent
literal test questions (Poole, 1990); that is, they uniformlyreflect or reiteratethe
itemsof the writtentest,as in ExamplesI and2 to follow. Heretheverbalinitiations
in the pretest and posttest reviews are essentially identical to the written test
questions.

TESTINGANDTHECONSTRUCTION
OF KNOWLEDGE

131

Example 1:
A. Pretest review (Wells, TR-1)5
T: And whe::re? (.) was the Whiskey Rebellion (0.4) where was the risWhiskey Rebellion.
T: Ed- - - (0.4) stop playing (0.4) OK. (Ab- - -)
(Ab): (
)
T: Well, you've given me a city. I want a state.
(Ab): Pennsylvania
T: Shh:: (0.2) Pennsylvaniais correct(0.6) Pennsylvaniais correct.
B. Writtentest
11. The Whiskey Rebellion took place among farmers in (a) Massachusetts,
(b) Pennsylvania,(c) New York, (d) Maryland.
C. Posttest review (Wells, TR-2)
T: eleven uh Se- - - the Whiskey Rebellion took place among farmersin,
Se: B. Pennsylvania

Example2:
A. Pretest review (Chavez, TR-4)
T: All right ne:xt (3.8) I want you to kno::w (1.0) the nineteen twentynineteen twenty-fourImmigrationAct.
((students intervenewith clarificationquestions on previous topic))
T: nineteen twenty-fou:r:ImmigrationAct did what? (2.0) ImmigrationAct.
Whad it do?
SI: No more immigration
S2: oh i- i- it brang it brang people from Mexico
T: (It) clo::sed off immigrationinto this country

S:
(it) sent them ba:ck
T: Nineteen twenty-four ImmigrationAct stopped most immigrationfrom
other countries.
B. Writtentest
7. What did the immigrationact of 1924 do? Why did many Americanslike
this law?
C. Posttest review (Chavez, TR-5)
T: let's see. um: ImmigrationAct of 1924
SI: oh! stopped immigrantsfrom coming

S2:
oh!
T: stopped immigrantsfrom coming
purposes.The
'Thedata in these exampleshave been minimallysimplifiedfor presentation
is the omissionof noncurricular
studentutterancesand the
primaryformof such simplification
utterances
corresponding
by theteacher.
managerial

132

POOLE

1. T formulates
X.
proposition
Y within
2. T identifiesa constituent
X.
proposition
I--> 3. T asksquestionbasedon Y.
[3] and[4] (ideally)
R--> 4. S(s) (ideally)replieswithY.
reformulate
[1].
E--> 5. T evaluates,meaning:
"Youcompletedtheproposition
I formulated"
or
"Youdid not completetheproposition
I formulated."
1 Propositional
FIGURE
modelfortest-question
sequences.
Ochs, Schieffelin, and Platt (1979; cf. Griffin & Humphrey, 1978; Mehan,
1979) analyzed test-question-and-answer
sequences as comprising single propositions that span utterancesby more than one speaker.Throughsuch sequences,
novice and expertparticipatein the overt co-constructionof a single proposition.
In specific terms, the following initiate-reply sequence (from Grey, TR-7),
T:
Ss:

what'sthe capitalof Zaire.

Kinshasa

can be viewed as constitutingthe single proposition,"Kinshasais the capital of

Zaire"(cf. Poole, 1990). This interpretationsuggests that test-question-basedIRE
sequences constitute overt co-constructionsof teacher-formulatedpropositions.
Figure 16 proposes a sequence of cognitive and social acts throughwhich this
can occur.
In this model, [1] and [2] representa kind of intra-individualplanning of the
IRE sequence representedin [3] to [5], so thatthe initiationand reply moves ([3]
and [4]) constitutea reformulationof the teacher'soriginal proposition.In terms
of public discoursewithin the activity proper,the teacherdeterminesthe propositional content of ratified student utterances.In other words, to the extent that
classroominteractionis composedof IREsequencesinitiatedwith some varietyof
test-question,thatdiscoursecan be said to representa series of teacher-formulated
propositions.The structureof these testing events provides thatnearly all ratified
student utterancesoccur in sequences of this sort and that the entire process is
enactedin both written(the test) and spoken (the review) modalities.
In sum, a test-question sequence representsa primary locus for displaying
curricularknowledge in the testing events of this corpus. Throughthis sequence,
teacherunderstandingof whatcounts as school knowledge is conveyed to students
"Certaintest-questionstreatthe entire propositionas the constituentand do not focus on a single
component. I would thus interpret"identifyinga constituent"broadly, meaning to identify any part
of the proposition,includingthe whole of it.

TESTINGANDTHECONSTRUCTION
OF KNOWLEDGE

133

through a display that demands their repeated,overt participation.Seen in this

light, the test-question becomes a compelling tool for the socialization of
culturallyspecified knowledge, allowing the teacherto control the propositional
content of ratified student utterancesin a mannerconsistent with the dominant
epistemological orientationof the school.

TESTCURRICULUM
AS A DISPLAY
OF FACTS
The test-question sequences that encode the bulk of curricularinformationin
these data representa display of knowledge as discrete informationunits. This
display is constituted through a variety of linguistic and interactionaldevices
that, when viewed as a composite of co-occurringforms, may be seen to index
and sustain a positivistic view of knowledge. Through these devices, to be
identified and exemplified in this section, studentsnot only observe a display of
knowledge but also are requiredto participateovertly through verbal contributions.

ShortAnswersin Noun-Phrase
Form
Student contributionsto test-questionsequences are frequently in noun-phrase
form consisting of identifiableentities such as Republican,John Adams, Ohio,
FDIC, or birth certificate. For instance, in Examples 3 and 4, studentcontributions are consistently in the form of brief, unmodified noun phrases that point
to an identifiableentity or to a more complex, but labeled, phenomenonsuch as
"the New Deal." In the total corpus, 66 of 98 (67%) of the ratified studentreply
moves are constitutedin this kind of simple nounphraseform. Ratifiedcurricular
propositions are underscored.
Example3 (Wells,TR-2):
T: uh se-twelve Mc-Jay negotiateda treatybetweenthe UnitedStates
and, (0.6) uh::Gu-- Gu: I got it wrong.
T: uh:(0.8)
S: GreatBritain.
T: OK good. thirteenthe XYZ affairalmostbroughtthe UnitedStatesto
warwith(1.4) Va- - Va: A. France.
T: good.
Example4 (Chavez,TR-5):
T: all rightnumberthree.(
depression.

) who was presidentduringmost of the

134

POOLE
S:

John F. Kennedy.

T:

No::you'rethirtyyearslate.
TheodoreRoosevelt.

Ss:
S:
T:
S:
Ri-:
T:
S:

Roosevelt
FRANKLIN.
Roosevelt.
FranklinRoosevelt.
his wholeprogramwas, (
)
he (does)the new deal
Ss:
[newdeal
((Ss talking,laughing))
T: all rightpleaselet me continue.((T leaningon desk waitingfor quiet))
all right.Roosevelt'swholenew (.) programis called,
SS: new deal
T:

new deal. (.) all right.

The point here is not simply that student utterancesare constructedas noun
phrasesbut also that the linguistic form of the teacher'sinitiationmoves virtually
demands a noun phrase reply. In much of the data, the structureof teacher
initiations as incomplete sentence frames or product-oriented(Mehan, 1979)
WH-questions(who, what, etc.) dictates that ratifiedreplies will be constructed
as noun phrases.Throughoutthe corpus,initiationsthat would elicit explanations
or the linking of facts or ideas are largely neglected in favor of these forms,
which evoke more bounded,discrete utterancesfrom students.

Definitions
The converse of short noun phrase answers occurs in definition questions in
which the teacher articulates a noun phrase and the student contributes the
propositionalpredicate,as shown in Examples 5, 6, and 7:
Example5 (Chavez, TR-5):

T: bracerois:
Da: a farmerfromMexico(thatcomes over here)to workfor a while and
thengoes back.
T: andthengoes back.
Example 6 (Wells, TR-2):

T: ... at any ratea cabinetwas whatanswerum Os- - - (0.4)

adv- advisors
Os: E. a groupof (0.4) Presidential
T: good the s- excise tax, Mi- - -

Mi:

C. a tax on imports.

T:

all right.((quickly))no no no

TESTING
ANDTHECONSTRUCTION
OFKNOWLEDGE 135
Mi: uh--oh (0.8) C. a tax on goodsmadesold (or usedwithinthe country)
T: OK that'sone of the two thathavebeen mixedup
Example7 (Grey,TR-8):
T: Jo - - - what'sa landlockedcountry.
Jo: (no wateraroundit).
T: there'sno wateraroundit, (.) whatis aroundit?
Jo: land.
T: land.othercountries,right.
Although this type of definition question requiresa more complex linguistic
constructionfrom students,discrete noun phrase forms retaindiscourse salience
in the teacher'sutterances.In otherwords,definitionquestionsconstitutevariation
in the organizationaldisplay of knowledge, not a change in the underlying
epistemology.Eighteenpercentof the IREsequences in the corpusareconstructed
as definitions, so that, together with the short-answernoun phrases discussed
earlier, they account for 85% of all ratified curricularpropositions.

BaldAssertions
The question types already specified serve to create propositions that are
linguistically structuredas "facts" so as to seem incontrovertibleand without
value or affect. Bald assertive clauses, such as "The river that bordersthe Congo
is (the) Zaire"or "CharlesLindbergh(made)the first solo flight over the Atlantic,"
constitute the primary form of content presentation. These assertions are
consistently constructedfrom a third-personperspective, resulting in curricular
knowledge that is depersonalizedand separatedfrom participantsin the manner
described by Giroux (1981; see passage quoted earlier). In addition, there is
virtually no occurrenceof modal verb forms (e.g., would, might, could) or other
evidential markers that would serve to index affective stance or degree of
(un)certaintytowarda proposition(Biber & Finegan, 1988; Chafe, 1986; Ochs,
1988).
Chafe (1986) interpretedevidentiality"in its broadest sense," "to cover any
linguistic expression of attitudes toward knowledge" (p. 271). In addition to
modal forms, such expressions include markers of reliability (e.g., surely,
perhaps,probably,primarily),belief forms (e.g., suppose, guess), inductiveforms
(e.g., obvious, seem, evidently), hedges (sort of, kind of, about), and forms
signaling expectations(e.g., of course, oddly enough, in fact, actually). In other
words, evidentialsrepresentthe kind of linguistic form that can reduce the bald
assertive status of a proposition;however, they occur only rarely in the testing
language investigated here. This lack of overt perspective marking creates an
effect of certainty with respect to test content-that is, these are unarguable
propositions toward which any degree of speculation seems inappropriate.

136

POOLE

U.S. history)illustratehow
Segmentsfromone lesson (Wells,eighth-grade
these sortsof linguisticmarkerscan occurregularlyoutsidethe test or review
environmentin a mannerthatcontrastswith the corpusanalyzedhere.In the
followingexcerpt(Example8), a rangeof formsandexpressionsindicatesthe
teacher'sattitudetowardthe curricularinformationas well as towardthe
textbook'somissionof the topic of federalism:(Evidentialmarkersand more
lengthyexpressionsof attitudeareunderscored).
Example8 (Wells):
Well it's certainlyone of the most if not the mostfundamental
uh principlesof
the Constitution
andyet (0.6) yourtextbookdoesn'teven mentionit.
OK lately:uh manyobserversfeel (0.6) thatthe nationalgovernment
maybe uh:
which:sometimes
(0.4)youknowit's likea- (0.4)it's sortof likea (0.4)pendulum
one side has moreor seemsto be ha- uh havingmorepowerthananother.(0.6)
butin recentyears,thetrendseemsto be toward(0.4) the:uhnationalgovernment
uh havingmostof the power.

Discreteand IsolableTopics
Discourse cohesion or topic continuityacross the test-questionsequences
describedearlierseems to derive largely from numbereditems on a printedpage

ratherthanfroman integrated
or holisticdiscussionof thetext-basedtopics.Few
of the initiate-reply sequences are connected to one another through anaphora
(text-boundlinguistic reference),with the averagenumberof IRE sequences per
topic or test item being only 1.28. This results in a display of seemingly
independent,decontextualizedunits and furtherinstantiatesthe display of school
knowledge as a body of discrete informationitems. The most strikingexample
of this lack of topic continuity occurs in TR-2 (see Examples 3 and 6), which
is based on a textbook publisher's test-a document that instantiates in the
extreme the claims made in this article with respect to knowledge objectification.

In otherevents,particularly
thoseconductedby Mr.Chavez,setsof topically
connected IRE sequences, such as those in Example 4, do exist. Even here,

of one another,and topic

however,the sets remaindiscreteand independent
sequencingderivesfromnumbereditemson the printedpage ratherthanfrom
situatedconnectionsamongthe discoursetopics.

Curricular
Contentas DiscreteSymbol
Severalcommontest-itemconstructions-multiple
choice,matching,andoutlining-further encouragethe linguistic encoding of a positivist perspectivethrough

alphabeticandnumericalformsthatserveto representcurricular
knowledge.In

Example 9, propositionalcontentfrom a matchingexercise is deictically referred

OF KNOWLEDGE
TESTINGAND THECONSTRUCTION

137

to by studentsasD andB, with the resultthattheirutterancesgive discoursesalience

not to curricularcontentbut to its objectification.In the teacherevaluationmoves,
curricularcontentis made explicit but remainstied to the alphabeticsymbol.
Example 9 (Wells, TR-2):

T:

let'sgo on to interestnineteen(0.6) umCa-- - do youhaveinterest,(2.0)

Ca: D?

T:

didyou writewhatit was?

Ca: no

T:

all rightit is D it's moneyput- (1.2) moneypaidfor the use of money

T:
Fi:
T:
F:
T:

(0.4) (is) the way they put it.

Fi- - - how 'bout elector?
B?
OK you--did you write what it was?
no.
all right B a person who uh (1.8) votes for the President.

A similar phenomenon occurs in answers to multiple-choice questions (see

Example 10), in which the letterchoice is verbalizedas a portionof the student's

verbal contribution,again creating a context where content is tied to a discrete
symbol.
Example10 (Wells,TR-2):
T:

(2.6) OK let's-

uh: if you'll do the second one the Constitutiondoes

notprovidefo:r, (1.6) Ma- - -.

Ma: A. development
of politicalparties
T:

good.

In Example 11, the teacher explains how an outline question should have been
answered.The outline taskrequiresthatinformationbe brokeninto units,each unit
tied to a numericalor alphabetsymbol, and those symbols arrangedand manipulated with respectto one another.The languageof Example 10 incorporatesthose
features so that content is verbalized in relation to an emphaticallyarticulated
numberor letter.
Example 11 (Wells, TR-3):
T:
Let's say A was Congress. Then under that you would want to have one
the House of Representativesand two the Senate ... Now another way
of tacklingit is ... (0.4) some of you said um (0.8) you madetwo Roman

numeralsyou saidthe- (0.4) (th-) Romannumeralone (0.4) theUnited

States Constitutionprovides threebranches(g-) of governmentand then
you said let's say A (0.6) Congress, B (0.6) the: President(0.4) C the:
Supreme Court and under A you ha- you should have one and two the
House and- and uh (0.4) the Senate,...

138

POOLE

Throughthe variouslinguisticand interactionalstrategiesoutlinedhere-short

nounphraseanddefinitionalanswers,baldassertiveclauses, lack of topic continuity, andthe encodingof informationin relationto a discretesymbol-the curricular
utterancesof this corpusfunctionto signify and sustain a culturalperspectivethat
values the learningof informationunitsas a formof knowledge.The test-questionderivedpropositionsof the corpusareparticularlyobvious linguistic instantiations
of the cultureof positivism attributedto the school context by Giroux(1981) and
others.Fromthe perspectiveof languagesocialization,these sequencesconstitute
a powerfulform of displaythroughwhich novices are directedto participatein the
linguistic structuringof positivisticknowledge.Furthermore,thatsuch knowledge
counts in terms of a recorded and lasting grade enhances its importance in
representingthe kind of knowledgethatcounts in school.

TESTINGAS THEOBJECTIFICATION
OF KNOWLEDGE
A comparison of the knowledge content displayed in these sequences with
previous presentationsof the same information suggests that testing events
encouragethe objectificationof complex knowledge into measurablecomponents.
Examples 12 and 13 demonstratehow the same informationis conveyed in four
contexts: the three test-relatedevents and a lesson context precedingthem. These
data show that the objective framing of curricularcontent in the testing events
is not necessarily matched in its original presentation.Rather the practice of
testing itself appearsto demandthe kind of linguistic encoding alreadydescribed.
In Example 12, the lesson presentationof the U.S. government'sforcible return
of braceros to Mexico in the face of domestic unemployment is transformed
through testing to "a bracero is a farmerfrom Mexico who comes up here to
work for a while and then goes back."
Example12 (Chavez-"braceros"):
A. Lesson
T: r'memberwhattheydid to the Mexicanswho came up hereto workon
the farmsright?the braceros( .. ) shipped'em back to Mexicowhen
Americanscouldn'tfindjobs ( .. )
((laterin the sameclass period))
S: ((readingfrom book)) In many regions of the Southwest,Mexican
immigrantsfaced prejudiceand segregation.However,theirwork was
to thegrowthof theSouthwest.In the 1920stheybeganto have
important
betterjob opportunities.
T: maybe.(1.2) you knowwhentheydidn'tkick 'em backout to Mexico.
B. Pretestreview(TR-4)
T: ((writes"bracero"))
you knowwhata bracerois?
Ss: Farmer!

OF KNOWLEDGE
TESTINGAND THECONSTRUCTION

Ss: (

139

S: they pay 'em a littlebit

S: yeah
T: 'n thenthey send 'em back(..) but( .. ) all right( .. ) bracerois a
farmerfromMexicowho worksupherefor a littlebitandthengoesback.
C. Writtentest
10. Identifytwoof the following:
Prohibition
CharlesLindbergh
PasadenaFreeway
Bracero
D. Posttestreview(TR-5)
T: bracerois:
Da: a farmerfromMexico(thatcomesoverhere)to workfora whileandthen
goes back.
T: andthengoes back.
Close examinationof these examples suggests thatthe definitionalconstruction
of the test item may work to discouragemention of the more politically charged
issues central to the lesson talk of Example 12A, where braceros are depicted
largely as victims of U.S. prejudiceand economic conditions. This presentation
is echoed in the review prior to the test, 12B, with "they pay 'em a little bit"
and " 'n then they send 'em back"-two utterancesthat are syntacticallyparallel
to the presentationin 12A. In each, the subject, they, refers to Americans, and
the object, 'em, refers to braceros-a constructionthat seemingly facilitates the
portrayalof braceros as victims. In the remainderof the test-relatedtalk, the
definitional question ("Identify bracero") demands an answer where bracero
functions as sentential subject In this linguistic context, the teacher'spredicate
constructionin 12B ("bracerois a farmerfrom Mexico who works up here for
a little bit and then goes back") is decidedly neutral when comparedwith the
lesson context ("shipped 'em back to Mexico when Americans couldn't find
jobs; kicked 'em back out to Mexico"). This neutralityis subsequentlyechoed
in the student's response in 12D.
The teacher(12A) also questions the factlikepresentationof the textbookwith
"maybe(1.2) you know when they didn't kick 'em backout to Mexico,"explicitly
disputingthe text's claim of betterjob opportunitiesfor Mexican immigrantsin
the 1920s. This utterancefurtherdemonstratesthe sorts of evidential markers
that can distinguish the language of teaching from that of testing.
The lesson language in Example 13A focuses on the K.K.K. and is similarly
distinct from the testing discourse that follows it.
Example 13 (Chavez-"K.K.K."):

A. Lesson

T: 1919 K.K.K.starts again. Now watch this all right.hhhK.KX.K.:

standsfor:,

Ss: Ku KluxKlan

140

POOLE
T: Ku Klux Klan right?(0.4) And: they basically disappearedfrom the South
about 1890(1.0) all right?The- they reallydisappeared.BY: 1919 though
.hh right after we get out of World War I ... (1.0) all right, a group is
gonna startup again in Ohio (0.8) it's gonna be in the Northnot the South
this time. And they're gonna take over the state governments like the
governorand th- th- st- lieutenantgovernorof Ohio and Indiana(0.6)
all right they're gonna become this really popular group. And this time
though they don't just hate Blacks (1.2) Now (0.4) and this is the same
group today. They hate Blacks of course. (1.2) ((softly and dramatically))
Catholics:, (0.4) Mexicans:, (0.4) Asians, (0.4) Jews (1.6) OK? Anybody
who is not WhiteAnglo-Saxon Protestant(1.2) OK? So they hate basically
everybody. (1.2) all right ( . . ) who is not like them. And this is the same
group that we really have- that- that's really today. all right. But they
started again in Ohio. All right? So what you're gonna see is that you
know all along in this textbook 'n partiallyit's my fault too you've been
hearing that most prejudicehappensdown South. All right?But that'sjust
not true. There's a lot and actually you can even say more so up North.

B. Pretest review (TR-4)

T: ((writes 1919)) 1919 K.K.K. startedagain where?
S: uh
S: uh in(..)Ohio
S: Ohio
S: Indiana
T: Ohio ( .. ) It startedagain up North. Ohio first and then Indiana.
S: K.K.K.
T: all right? and this time they hated,
S: everybody ( . . ) Asians
T: Asians. Blacks
S: Jews
T: Jews
S: Well they always hated Blacks
T: Catholics. Mexicans. anybody who's not White Anglo-Saxon Protestant.
S: who didn't they like before?
T: just Blacks. It's mostly an anti-Blackorganization.
C. Writtentest
5. When did the K.K.K. startagain? Where?Who are they against?Name 4.
D. Posttest review (TR-5)
T: NEXT. when did the K.K.K. start again?
Ss: 1919
T: you know th-it was odd. this is one that everybody got.
S: you (..) tell us.
T: all right. (..)WHERE?
S: in Ohio.
T: Ohio. NOT Florida. Contraryto popularbelief.
S: ((quietly)) They were against Mexican (
) (Jews) and Chinese.

TESTING AND THE CONSTRUCTIONOF KNOWLEDGE

141

The original lesson presentationin 13A is markedby a rangeof evidentialforms

indicating speaker attitude toward propositionalcontent (e.g., basically, really,
of course) as well as a more elaborate expression of disagreement with the
textbook. Example 13A is also constructed as a narrativemarked by several
linguistic devices that function to heighten listener involvement (Chafe, 1981;
Tannen, 1982). For example, in describingthe events of 1919, the use of present
and future (gonna) tenses and the deictic forms, this time and this, contributeto
the story's sense of immediacy.In addition,the affective intensityof the account
is strengthenedby the teacher's shifting prosody, emphatic pausing, and his
repeated lexical choice of hate. As the testing events progress, however, the
future and present tenses shift to past, hate becomes a more neutralbe against,
and evidential forms no longer occur. Accompanyingthese linguistic changes is
a progressiveobjectificationof curricularcontent,so that,by the final test review,
only the date and place are ratified by the teacher.7
Examples 12 and 13 point to an increasedtendencytowarda bounded,discrete
display of school knowledge as the class moves from lessons to the test-related
sequence of events. In these instances, content is originally presentedin terms
of affectively andpolitically chargedissues. As the sequenceof test-relatedevents
progresses, however, those issues recede, and the presentationof knowledge
becomes reduced to the display of boundedobject units. This discrete encoding
of curricularinformationrepresentsa neutralpresentationof curriculumin which
conflict and its attendantcauses are implicitly devalued.In Apple's (1990) terms:
Theperspectivefoundin schoolsleansheavilyuponhow all elementsof a society
... arelinkedto eachotherin a functionalrelationship,
eachcontributing
to the
of society.Internaldissensionand conflictin a societyare
ongoingmaintenance
antitheticalto thesmoothfunctioningof thesocial order.(p.
viewedas inherently
93, italicsadded)
As demonstrated,this tendency toward a display of consensus dominates the
test-question sequences of this corpus, even though notions of conflict might
have markedthe original lesson presentation(cf. Anyon, 1979).

TESTINGINTHEDEVELOPMENT
OF FACTUALKNOWLEDGE
The languageof testing versus that of teaching, as constitutedin these examples,
parallels a growing body of research analyzing the social development of
discipline-specific knowledge as contextualized across a range of discourse
7Theteacherdid not acknowledgethe final studentutteranceof this sequence-"They were against
Mexican (
) (Jews) and Chinese."--during the final test review and registeredsurprisewhen he
read it on the transcript.

142

POOLE

environments:journal articles, laboratorydiscussions, lectures, and textbooks

(Fleck, 1935/1979; Latour,1987; Latour& Woolgar, 1979; Myers, 1992; Ziman,
1984). This work has found that early presentationsof academic findings, in
which the status of knowledge is largely at the level of claim (e.g., journal
articles),are characterizedby a personaland provisionalencoding of information
(Fleck, 1979), frequent reference to sources (Latour & Woolgar, 1979), and
evidential constructionssuch as hedging or modality(Myers, 1992). By the time
such findings are incorporatedinto textbooks, however, they have typically
become accepted within a discipline as factual and are encoded throughthe sort
of bald assertionsfound in the testing data investigatedhere.
This similarity points to systemic connections between the two discourse
environments.The natureof such connectionsis suggested in Example 14, which
includes both a test question and the textbook excerpt on which it is based. In
14A, assertionsin the text are made baldly in a mannerconsistentwith the studies
cited; however, they are information-richin comparisonwith the test-question
deriving from them (14B). The textbook characterizesthe Sedition Act as the
"harshest"among a set of early U.S. laws, specifying its political origins and
repressiveconsequences. The test question, however, bypasses this information,
so that all referencesto conflict, unconstitutionality,and repressionare avoided.
In other words, if the diachronic approachto the "life of a fact" is extended
beyond the text, the test of that text presentationrepresentsa next stage, which
may, as in this instance, furtherthe process of knowledge objectification.
Example14:
A. Textbookexcerpt
Federalistsused the troubleswith Franceto pass a numberof laws in 1798.
The Federalistshopedthe laws wouldmaketheirown partystronger.
TheSeditionAct was theharshest.It statedthatanyonewho spokeagainst
the Presidentor membersof Congresscouldbe finedor jailed.This act was
The
passedto halt all criticismof the Federalists,
especiallyby Republicans.
law also went againstthe rightsof citizensto free speechand a free press,
rights protectedby the Constitution.At least three editorsof Republican
newspapersweresentto prison.(VerSteeg, 1982,p. 208)
B. Publisher-constructed
writtentest
A law the Federalistshopedwouldstrengthen
theirpartywas the (a) whiskey
tax law, (b) JayTreaty,(c) SeditionAct, (d) TwelfthAmendment.
The congruenceof the test data presentedhere with the textbook analyses of
Latour (1987), Ziman (1984), Myers (1992), and others also points to the role
both play in the socialization of novices to a field of study, suggesting that the
kind of knowledge deemed suitable for initial learning is in many instances the
discrete,boundedsort identifiedearlier.Traweek's(1988) accountof undergraduate physics textbooks articulatedthis view:

TESTING AND THE CONSTRUCTIONOF KNOWLEDGE

143

Undergraduate
physicsstudentsarebeingaskedto shifttheirattentionfromwhat
is visibleandemotionallyengagingto the lowerend of the scale,whichthe text
proposesis fundamental.... Theylearnthatinformation
taughtat each stageis
oftendistortedor partial,a veryroughapproximation
of the truth,whichis to be
disclosedat laterstages.Novicesare thoughtto be unsuitedto a full disclosureof
truthin thesefirst years.(p. 80, italicsadded)
Recent analyses of novice-expert learningencountersin nonacademicsettings,
however,presenta contrastingpicturewhich suggests thatthe positivisticperspective of tests andtextbooksis not an inevitableconsequenceof novice participation.
For example, Patthey (1991) and Ochs, Taylor, Rudolph, and Smith (1992)
documented language settings (computer laboratoryconsultations and family
dinner conversations,respectively) in which a complex arrayof problem-solving
strategiesarise naturallyfrom the social conditionsof talk (cf. Lave, 1988). Ochs
et al. argued,in fact, thatthe kindsof narrativeactivitiescharacterizingthe intimate
setting of dinner time constitute a socialization context where children learn
languagehabits associatedwith the developmentof scientific theory.Conversely,
the data of my study suggest that test-questionsequences function to discourage
such complex language behaviors and restrictstudent contributionsto minimal
responses thatserve to reconstructteacher-formulated
propositions.

IMPLICATIONS
The events considered in this study constitute a culturally accepted form of
bounding a learning sequence in which participants display school-valued
knowledge. The data have indicatedthat testing and test-relatedactivities evoke
a phenomenon of knowledge objectification-that is, testing encourages an
objectifiable, seemingly value-freeform of knowledge presentation.Even where
societally charged issues such as class, ethnicity, or discriminationdominate a
teacher'soriginalpresentationof a topic, those issues recede as the topic becomes
partof a test and informationis distilled to its most basic thematicrelations.The
data furthersuggest that, in testing, the dominantdiscourseform throughwhich
students participate in ratified curriculartalk is the test-question-basedIRE
sequence. In such sequences, the propositionalcontent of student utterancesis
largely determinedby the teacher.This characteristic,I have argued,rendersthe
test-questiona powerfulcontextfor the socializationof whatcountsas knowledge.
The sort of knowledge display constitutiveof these events is consistent with
earlier testing researchpointing to the limitations of the objectified knowledge
requiredof standardizedtesting encounters(MacKay, 1974; Mehan, 1973, 1978;
Roth, 1974). When viewed in light of this work, the findings here suggest an
overwhelming tendency for testing language to frame curricularknowledge in

144

POOLE

positivistic terms.8Testing-languageof the kind investigatedin this article thus

appearsto inhibitholistic approaches(e.g., critical thinkingor problem solving)
to curriculartopics; more generally, these results call into question the kinds of
routine tests that typify many school experiences.
The limitationsposed by the discreteframingof curricularknowledgein testing,
especially when considered vis-a-vis the classroom lesson data presented here,
point to a need for alternativemodels of assessment where school-valuedknowledge can be assessed in a morecomplex form. It is beyondthe scope of this article
to discuss or identify such models; however, the analysis lends additionalweight
to the growing movement toward "authenticassessment,"which employs such
tools as portfolios and structuredinterviews (see, e.g., Barrs, 1990; Gardner&
Hatch, 1989; Pearson, 1988; Wiggins, 1989; Wolf, 1987-1988). These forms of
assessment are designed to reflect and integratewith teaching in a mannerthat
avoids a reductionisticframing of knowledge. Although furtherlanguage-based
researchwould be necessary to confirm such a difference,the goals and methods
of authenticassessment suggest that its linguistic constructionwould representa
substantialdeparturefrom the testing languagedocumentedhere.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was supported in part by grants from the University of Southern
California (The Morkovin Foundation)and from CaliforniaState University's
Committeefor Research,Scholarship,and CreativeActivity and SummerFaculty
Fellowship Program.
I also wish to thank Elinor Ochs and Genevieve Patthey-Chavezfor their
helpful comments on earlierdrafts of this article.

REFERENCES
Anyon, J. (1979). Ideology and United States history textbooks. Harvard Educational Review, 49,
361-389.
Apple, M. (1990). Ideology and curriculum.New York: Routledge.
Barrs, M. (1990). The primarylanguage record:Reflections of issues in evaluation.Language Arts,
67, 244-253.
"8Elsewhere
(Poole, 1989, 1994) I have analyzed in detail the extensive differentiatingactivity
throughwhich the asymmetryof knowledge among studentsis made publicduringthe posttestreview
(when students learn their grades). The data of the presentstudy suggest that this selective activity
is facilitated by the positivistic construction of knowledge. Because of its discrete and bounded
qualities, the "knowledge"of testing can easily be ascribedan objective value in the form of a grade
or number,allowing and encouraginggrade comparisonand acts of differentiationamong students.
In other words, the constitutionof school knowledge as positivistic and objective in testing serves
the selective process.

TESTING AND THE CONSTRUCTIONOF KNOWLEDGE

145

Berger,P., Berger, B., & Kellner,H. (1973). The homeless mind: Modernizationand consciousness.
New York: Random House.
Biber, D., & Finegan, E. (1988). Adverbialstance types in English. Discourse Processes, 11, 1-34.
Chafe, W. (1981). Integrationand involvementin speaking, writing,and oral literature.In D. Tannen
(Ed.), Spoken and written language: Exploring orality and literacy (pp. 35-54). Norwood, NJ:
Ablex.
Chafe, W. (1986). Evidentiality:The linguistic encoding of epistemology. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Cicourel, A. V., Jennings, S. H. M., Jennings, K. H., Leiter, K. C. W., MacKay, R., Mehan, H., &
Roth, D. R. (Eds.). (1974). Language use and school performance.New York: Academic.
Fleck, L. (1979). The genesis and development of a scientific fact (T. Trenn, Trans.). Chicago:
Universityof Chicago Press. (Originalwork published 1935)
Freire,P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Seabury.
Gardner,H., & Hatch, T. (1989). Multiple intelligences go to school. EducationalResearcher, 18,
"4-10.
Giroux, H. (1981). Ideology, culture and the process of schooling. Philadelphia:Temple University
Press.
Griffin, P., & Humphrey,F. (1978). Task and talk. In R. Shuy & P. Griffin (Eds.), The study of
children's functional language and education in the early years (Final report to the Carnegie
Corporationof New York). Arlington,VA: Center for Applied Linguistics.
Hymes, D. (1962). The ethnographyof speaking. In T. Gladwin & W. C. Sturtevant (Eds.),
Anthropologyand human behavior (pp. 13-53). Washington, DC: Anthropological Society of
Washington.
Kolevzon, E. R., & Heine, J. A. (1977). Our world and its peoples. Belmont, CA: Allyn & Bacon.
Latour,B. (1987). Science in action. Milton Keynes, England:Open University Press.
Latour,B., & Woolgar,S. (1979). Laboratorylife: Thesocial constructionof scientificfacts. Chicago:
Universityof Chicago Press.
Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice. New York: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talkingscience. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Long, M. H., & Sato, C. J. (1983). Classroom foreigner talk discourse: Forms and functions of
teachers'questions.In H. W. Seliger & M. H. Long (Eds.), Classroomorientedresearch in second
language acquisition (pp. 268-286). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
MacKay,R. (1974). Standardizedtests: Objectiveand objectivizedmeasures.In A. V. Cicourel,S. H.
M. Jennings, K. H. Jennings, K. C. W. Leiter, R. MacKay, H. Mehan, & D. R. Roth (Eds.),
Language use and school performance(pp. 218-247). New York: Academic.
Marlaire,C. L., & Maynard,D. W. (1990). Standardizedtesting as an interactionalphenomenon.
Sociology of Education,63, 83-101.
McClaren,P. (1989). Life in schools: An introductionto critical pedagogy in the foundations of
education. New York: Longman.
Mehan, H. (1973). Assessing children'slanguage-usingabilities. In J. M. Armer & A. D. Grimshaw
(Eds.), Methodological issues in comparative sociological research (pp. 309-343). New York:
Wiley.
Mehan, H. (1978). Structuringschool structure.Harvard EducationalReview, 48, 32-64.
Mehan, H. (1979a). Learning lessons. Cambridge,MA: HarvardUniversity Press.
Mehan, H. (1979b). "Whattime is it, Denise?": Asking known informationquestions in classroom
discourse. TheoryInto Practice, 28, 285-294.
Mehan, H., & Wood, H. (1976). The reality of ethnomethodology.New York: Wiley-Interscience.
Myers,G. (1992). Textbooksandthe sociology of scientific knowledge.Englishfor SpecificPurposes,
11, 3-17.
Ochs, E. (1984). Clarificationand culture.In D. Schiffrin (Ed.), Georgetown Universityround table
on languages and linguistics (pp. 325-341). Washington,DC: Georgetown UniversityPress.
Ochs, E. (1987). Indexicality and socialization. Unpublished manuscript,University of Southern
California,Departmentof Linguistics, Los Angeles.

146

POOLE

Ochs, E. (1988). Cultureand language development:Languageacquisitionand language socialization

in a Samoan village. New York: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Ochs, E., & Schieffelin, B. B. (1984). Languageacquisitionand socialization:Three developmental
stories and their implications.In R. Shweder& R. Levine (Eds.), Culturetheory: Essays on mind,
self, and emotion (pp. 276-320). Cambridge,England:CambridgeUniversity Press.
Ochs, E., Schieffelin, B. B., & Platt, M. (1979). Propositionsacross utterancesand speakers. In E.
Ochs & B. B. Schieffelin (Eds.), Developmentalpragmatics (pp. 251-268). New York: Academic.
Ochs, E., Taylor, C., Rudolph, D., & Smith, R. (1992). Storytellingas a theory-buildingactivity.
Discourse Processes, 15, 37-72.
Patthey,G. (1991). The language of problemsolving in a computerlaboratory.Doctoraldissertation,
University of SouthernCalifornia,Los Angeles.
Pearson, H. (1988). The assessment of reading throughobservation.Reading, 22, 158-163.
Poole, D. (1989). Everydaytesting as language socialization: A study of the quiz review. Doctoral
dissertation,University of SouthernCalifornia,Los Angeles.
Poole, D. (1990). ContextualizingIRE in an eighth-gradequiz review. Linguisticsand Education,2,
185-211.
Poole, D. (1994). Differentiationas an interactionalconsequence of routine classroom testing.
QualitativeStudies in Education, 7, 1-17.
Roth, D. R. (1974). Intelligence testing as a social activity. In A. V. Cicourel, S. H. M. Jennings,
K. H. Jennings,K. C. W. Leiter, R. MacKay, H. Mehan, & D. R. Roth (Eds.), Language use and
school performance(pp. 143-217). New York: Academic.
Schenkein, J. (1978). Studies in the organization of conversational interaction (pp. xi-xvi). New
York: Academic.
Schieffelin, B. B., & Ochs, E. (1986a). Languagesocialization.AnnualReview of Anthropology,15,
163-191.
Schieffelin, B. B., & Ochs, E. (1986b). Languagesocializationacross cultures.New York:Cambridge
University Press.
Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. (1981). Narrative,literacyandface in interethniccommunication.Norwood,
NJ: Ablex.
Sinclair, J. M., & Coulthard,R. M. (1975). Toward an analysis of discourse. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Tannen,D. (1982). Oral and literatestrategiesin spoken and writtennarratives.Language, 58, 1-21.
Traweek, S. (1988). Beamtimesand lifetimes: The world of high energy physicists. Cambridge,MA:
HarvardUniversity Press.
Ver Steeg, C. L. (1982). American spirit: A history of the United States. Chicago, IL: Follett.
Wentworth,W. M. (1980). Context and understanding:An inquiry into socialization theory. New
York: Elsevier.
Wiggins, G. (1989). A truetest: Toward moreauthenticand equitableassessment.Phi Delta Kappan,
70, 703-713.
Wolf, D. P. (1987-1988, December-January).Opening up assessment. EducationalLeadership,pp.
24-29.
Woods, P. (1979). The divided school. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Ziman, J. (1984). An introductionto science studies. Cambridge,England:Cambridge University
Press.

TESTING AND THE CONSTRUCTIONOF KNOWLEDGE

147

APPENDIXA: TRANSCRIPTION
CONVENTIONS
Meaning

Symbol

Overlappingutterances
Contiguous utterances
High rising intonation
Low rising intonation
Falling intonation
Transcriberdoubt
Unintelligible utterance
Extension of sound or syllable
Timed pause (in tenths of a second)
Untimed pause
Contextualinformation
Word cut off
Stressed speech
Increasedvolume
Deleted word(s)
Deleted turn
Unidentifiablestudentor students
Teacher

[
?

(Word)
(
)
(1.2)
( ..)
))
((
DashItalics
CAPS

S/Ss
T
Note. Sources: Schenkein (1978) and Ochs (1988).

APPENDIXB: WRITTENTESTS
The following tests are those on which the eight test reviews of the spoken corpus
are based. The appropriateevent designation-Wells (TR-1, TR-2), Chavez
(TR-4), and so on--is given at the beginning of each test. The original test
format and wording is maintainedhere as much as possible.

Wells (TR-1, TR-2)

Chapter10 Test
Place these events in the order in which they occurred, using the numbers I
through5.
Congress passes an excise tax on whiskey.
Republicanelectors give Jefferson and Burr the same numberof votes.
The Senate accepts the Jay Treaty.
Congress passes its first tariff under the Constitution.
Washingtonissues a proclamationof neutrality.
Write the letter of the item that correctly completes each statement.

148

POOLE

6. A law the Federalistshoped would strengthentheir party was the (a)

whiskey tax law, (b) Jay Treaty, (c) Sedition Act, (d) Twelfth
Amendment.
7. The Constitutiondoes NOT providefor the (a) developmentof political
parties, (b) Supreme Court, (c) Congress, (d) method of electing a
President.
8. For his secretary of state, Washington chose (a) Henry Knox, (b)
Thomas Jefferson, (c) EdmundRandolph,(d) AlexanderHamilton.
9. In 1789 Congress decided that the SupremeCourtshould have a chief
justice and (a) two otherjustices, (b) threeotherjustices, (c) four other
justices, (d) five otherjustices.
10. Washington,D.C., was once a partof (a) Marylandand Pennsylvania,
(b) Virginia and Delaware, (c) Marylandand Virginia, (d) Delaware
and Pennsylvania.
11. The Whiskey Rebellion took place among farmers in (a) Massachusetts, (b) Pennsylvania,(c) New York, (d) Maryland.
12. Jay negotiateda treaty between the United States and (a) France, (b)
Spain, (c) Great Britain, (d) Portugal.
13. The XYZ affair almost brought the United States to war with (a)
France, (b) Great Britain, (c) Spain, (d) Portugal.
14. The idea of a nationalbank was first proposedby (a) Washington,(b)
Jefferson, (c) Madison, (d) Hamilton.
15. The first Vice-Presidentunder the Constitutionwas (a) Jefferson, (b)
Adams, (c) Madison, (d) Hamilton.
Write the letter of the correct definition before each term in the column on the
left.
16. cabinet
17. excise tax
18. tariff
19. interest
20. elector

a. a tax on imports
b. a person who votes for the President
c. a tax on goods made, sold, or used
within a country
d. money paid for the use of money
e. a group of Presidentialadvisors

The underlineditem makeseach statementfalse. On the line below each statement

[not shown here], write the item that makes the statementtrue.
21. When Washingtondrew up his first treaty,he asked advice from the House
of Representatives.
22. Thomas Jefferson was a strong Federalist.
23. Hamilton firmly believed in keeping close ties with France.
24. By 1796 Washingtonhad served three terms as President.

TESTING AND THE CONSTRUCTIONOF KNOWLEDGE

149

25. At the time of the XYZ affair, George Washington was President.

Wells (TR-3)
QUIZ-DOCUMENT/CONSTITUTION/OUTLINE
1. Which are documents?Place a check next to each item that is a document.
U.S.
birth certificate _ marriage license
Alice in Wonderland
Constitution
2. A document has how many parts?_ List the parts below.
3. Unscramblethe mixed-up sentence (anagram)below and write it correctly.
statementof is A governmentof constitution
principles a the written and basic a
4. The United States Constitutionwas writtenand signed in what year?
5. Outline the following sentences:
The United States Constitutionprovides three branchesof government.
They are Congress,the President,andthe SupremeCourt.Congressis divided
into two houses or bodies called the House of Representativesand the Senate.
The Constitutionalso provides a Bill of Rights.

Chavez (TR-4, TR-5, TR-6)

HISTORYTEST
1. WHAT IS THE AFL-CIO? WHO WAS ONE OF ITS EARLY LEADERS?
HOW DID HE HELP THEIR CAUSE?
2. WHAT WERE THE DATES FOR THE GREAT DEPRESSION?
3. WHO WAS PRESIDENT DURING MOST OF THE DEPRESSION?
WHAT WAS HIS WHOLE PROGRAMCALLED? WHAT DID IT DO?
4. NAME TWO PROGRAMS STARTED DURING THE DEPRESSION.
EXPLAIN WHAT EACH DID.
5. WHEN DID THE K.K.K. START AGAIN? WHERE? WHO ARE THEY
AGAINST-NAME 4.
6. HOW DOES LARGEUNEMPLOYMENTCAUSE PROBLEMSFOR THE
COUNTRY? EXPLAIN HOW THIS "CYCLE OF UNEMPLOYMENT'
WORKED TO KEEP THE NATION IN THE DEPRESSION.
7. WHAT DID THE IMMIGRATIONACT OF 1924 DO? WHY DID MANY
AMERICANSLIKE THIS LAW?
8. WHAT IS THE ONLY ORIGINAL"AMERICAN"MUSIC? WHEREDID
IT START? WHO WERE SOME OF THE PEOPLEINVOLVED?

150

POOLE

9. WHAT HAPPENED TO THE AMERICANINDIANS IN 1934? WHY IS

THIS ODD?
10. IDENTIFY TWOOF THE FOLLOWING:
PROHIBITION
CHARLES LINDBERGH
PASADENA FREEWAY
BRACERO

Grey(TR-7,TR-8)
Why is the countryof Chad a landlockedCountry?
Name 3 CentralAF [African] Countriesthat borderAtlantic.
How would you describe the land surroundingL. Chad?
What are three Causes of L. Chad shrinking?
What is meant by the Zaire R. is navigable?
Why is CentralAF sometimes referredto as equatorialAF?
What was the reason Kanem-Bornudeclined Adam Empire?
What did the Belgians do for the Congo?
a. What do you think the people of the Congo gave up for it?
9. How would you describe the land & people of Chad?
10. What are the cash crops of Chad? What is a cash crop?
11. Name the most densely populatedcountryof CentralAF.
12. Why is Douala important?
13. Is CentralAfrican Republic mostly urbanor rural?
14. What was the only country S. of the Saharacolonized by Sp [Spain]?
15. What river bordersthe Congo?
16. How do most of the people of the Congo make a living?
17. What are the cash crops of Gabon-&--Congo?
18. What is so importantabout the Congo?
19. Name the Capitalof Zaire.
20. Discuss- slash-burn - shifting cultivation.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.