that purpose. He agrees with researchers who argue that the ITBS should be replaced with a test directly linked to the city's academic standards. Vallas noted, however, that developing such a test would take three years; in the meantime, the ITBS will continue to be used for accountability (Olson, 1998).
Moreover, Philip Hansen, chief accountability officer for the Chicago Public Schools, told the committee that "we are committed to use the Iowa forever and ever." He went on to explain that, if the district were to drop the ITBS, it would lose credibility with the media and the public, who would view with suspicion any change to a new test. The new assessments, he said, would probably be used as course midterms and finals and be factored in as one component of a student's course grade.
The second dilemma stems from tensions between two motives for testing: the desire for more fairness and efficiency and the impulse to sort and classify students. Achievement testing first became a fixture of American public schools during the huge growth in mass education between 1870 and 1900, when enrollments more than doubled as waves of immigrants created a newly diverse student population. Demand grew for more efficient school management, including "the objective and efficient classification, or grading of pupils" (Tyack, 1974:44). Relying on tests was seen as fairer and more efficient than the prevailing system, in which children of varying ages and levels shared classrooms, and essay exams received widely varying grades from different teachers (Office of Technology Assessment, 1992; Haney, 1984).
The introduction of widespread intelligence testing during World War I allowed schools to begin measuring what testers believed to be students' aptitude for future learning, the IQ, in addition to using achievement tests to measure their past learning.2 As the technology of intelligence
In her history of the IQ test, Fass (1980) notes that the historical record shows a complete absence of agreement on a precise definition of intelligence and little concern among experts about the practical consequences of that absence. Intelligence came to be defined in practice as whatever a particular intelligence test measured. Consequently, according to Fass, "the significance of intelligence testing lies not in some intellectual formulation with a specific content, but in a methodology with instrumental results. In the course of creating, elaborating, and refining a method to evaluate the undefined, those who worked in the field of testing, those who used the tests in the schools, and the public, which welcomed the answers it provided, fashioned an instrument which would henceforth define what intelligence was. They had translated the culture's perceptions, and its needs, into a method for ordering, selecting, and directing its own evolution" (p. 452).