At the end of its first conference in Austin, Texas
yesterday, the Network for Public Education and Board Member Diane Ravitch held
a press conference to announce a call for a Congressional investigation into the
“over-emphasis, misapplication, costs, and poor implementation of high-stakes
standardized testing in the nation’s K-12 public schools.” Read
the NPE’s letter to Congress here. As this was going on, teachers in two
schools in Chicago were refusing to administer the ISAT, an Illinois state test
that the teachers claim is a waste of time. Meanwhile testing OPT
OUT movements are growing across the country and especially in New York
State in response to the clumsy rollout of the Common Core and allied
standardized tests by the NYDOE.
Most teachers are rightly concerned about the impact of
standardized testing on students, on curriculum, and now on their own job
security. Most also know that boycotting the proctoring of the test is not a
viable option for them. How should a classroom teacher, tenured or untenured,
respond to the overuse and misuse of standardized tests while maintaining a
professional stance?
I suggest three steps for teachers to take.
1. Get
well informed about the legitimate uses and rampant abuses of standardized
tests.
2. Proactively
demonstrate to parents, administrators and colleagues in your building that
your in-class, daily assessment of your students is far superior to the
information provided by standardized tests.
3. Get
active outside of school hours with groups that will support efforts to bring
the message of standardized test abuse to the political powers and the general
public.
Getting Informed
This will be by far the easiest step. The misuse of
standardized tests has been well documented for many years, going back to
before No Child Left Behind (NCLB). NCLB and Race to the Top (RTTT) have
exacerbated the problems by ramping up the stakes involved in student
performance on these tests.
Here is a summary of the issues related to standardized
testing. To learn more, I suggest you consult the fact
sheet put out by Fair Test that you can find here.
·
Standardized tests can be one part of a
comprehensive assessment system. However, they offer just a small piece of the
picture. Better methods of evaluating student needs and progress already exist.
Careful observation and documentation of student work and behaviors by trained
teachers is more helpful than a one-time test. Assessment based on student
performance on real learning tasks is more useful and accurate for measuring
achievement -- and provides more information for teaching -- than
multiple-choice achievement tests (Fair Test 2012).
·
Standardized tests are not good enough to
provide the primary source of information on student achievement.
·
Standardized tests are not good enough to
provide the primary information on the achievement gap.
·
Standardized tests are not good enough to
provide the primary information on school quality.
·
Standardized tests are not nearly good enough
nor were they ever intended to provide the primary information on teacher
effectiveness.
·
When standardized tests are used as a primary
measure of student performance, students from low-income and minority-group
backgrounds, English language learners, and students with disabilities, are
more likely to be denied diplomas, retained in grade, placed in a lower track,
or unnecessarily put in remedial education programs (Fair Test 2012).
·
The U.S. is the only economically advanced
nation to rely heavily on multiple-choice tests. Other nations use
performance-based assessment to evaluate students on the basis of real work
such as essays, projects and activities (Fair Test 2012).
·
An emphasis on high-stakes standardized tests
tends to narrow the curriculum to a focus on those things that will be tested.
·
An emphasis on multiple choice testing is not
supportive of the development of more complex reading, writing and critical
thinking abilities.
·
Standardized, fill in the bubble tests are
wildly inappropriate for very young children.
·
The proliferation of standardized tests steals instructional
time from teachers and learning time from children.
·
Standardized tests are generally not helpful for
diagnostic purposes because the score reports come in long after the student
takes the test and often without any item analysis of types of questions
students had difficulty with.
Providing a Better
Alternative
As classroom teachers we assess student learning daily in a
much richer way than can be captured on a standardized test. We need to make
our students and their parents aware of the rich assessment protocol that we
follow and how that helps us get to know each student as a learner.
Formative Assessment - As teachers we are constantly watching and
interacting with our students to assess their understanding and to determine if
they have achieved the objectives of a lesson. This formative assessment helps
us adjust our lessons mid-stream and provides invaluable information for side
conferences and small group instructional interventions that we might need to
get all students to achieve the learning goals.
While much of this assessment happens quickly and informally
while instruction is taking place, it is important that teachers document their
observations for future reflection, planning and reporting. I have found that
these “anecdotal notes” help me get a clear picture of the learner and provide
me, not only with data to reframe instruction, but also with a knowledge of the
individual child as a learner that I can then articulate to parents,
administrators and to the student him or herself.
Summative Assessment
– Occasional, well crafted, teacher created quizzes and tests that are based on
the material taught in class are also part of the teacher’s toolbox in
diagnosing learning and adjusting instruction. Occasional summative assessments
have the added benefit of focusing student learning on the key ideas that they
must grasp.
We can group both of these types of assessment as “authentic.”
Formative assessment is authentic because it is tied to the actual student
performance of learning tasks under the watchful eye of the teacher. Summative
tests are authentic in the sense that they are tied to the actual material
taught in the classroom.
Combining these two types of assessment allows the teacher to truly know each child as a learner. This knowledge is powerful in
conversations with parents, administrators and colleagues. Nothing convinces
parents that their child is in good hands better than a teacher who can look
them in the eye and say, "This is what I see about Johnny as a learner and here
is why I think so." Parents who get this type of information about a child will
see that this kind of rich knowledge is not available from standardized tests.
Taking Action
Social media has made it possible for people of common
interest to join together in concerted action as never before. Numerous parent
and teacher groups have been formed around Facebook and other platforms to
provide moral support, share information and create events. It is the
responsibility of the concerned professional to find a way to support these
groups, provide information and get involved in ani-test abuse actions. The
groups out there right now include Opt
Out of State Tests, Children are More than Test Scores, and Lace to the Top. Join these groups on
Facebook and lend your voice to the cause.
The teaching profession has been taking unjustified hits for
many years now. The corporate education reformers have stolen the narrative
about public education, so that now the public thinks of “failure factories”
and “bad teachers” and “school choice” and “accountability” as the story of
American public education. These corporate
reformers are well-financed and they are on a mission. All of us must find a
way to raise our voices to defend public education and represent the profession
by taking action and by providing our clients, the parents and children, with
the kind of high quality assessment data that only the professional educator in
the classroom with the child every day can provide.
No comments:
Post a Comment