Henry Levin, the distinguished economist at Teachers College, has written an important new article in which he explains that test scores are only one dimension of student and national success. The link is only available for four weeks. It is only about 20 pages, so be sure to read it now or soon.
He shows, with extensive documentation, that non-cognitive qualities– like motivation, persistence, the ability to get along with others–are no less important than cognitive qualities and are undervalued in the present climate.
The international race to get higher and higher test scores ignores the non-cognitive dimension. It is a race that will narrow what children learn, what teachers may teach. It is not good for children or societies. It is a race that no one will win.
Here is the abstract:
Ó UNESCO IBE 2012
Abstract Around the world we hear considerable talk about creating world-class schools. Usually the term refers to schools whose students get very high scores on the international comparisons of student achievement such as PISA or TIMSS. The practice of restricting the meaning of exemplary schools to the narrow criterion of achievement scores is usually premised on the view that test scores are closely linked to the provision of a capable labour force and competitive economy. In fact, the measured relationships between test scores and earnings or productivity are modest and explain a relatively small share of the larger link between educational attainment and economic outcomes. What has been omitted from such narrow assessments are the effects that education has on the development of interpersonal and intrapersonal skills and capabilities that affect the quality and productivity of the labour force. This article provides evidence on some of these relationships, on the degree to which the non-cognitive effects of schooling contribute to adult performance, and on the evidence that deliberate school interventions can influence non-cognitive outcomes. It concludes with the view that the quest for world-class schools must encompass a range of human development characteristics that extend considerably beyond test scores.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
It’s 39$ if your not a subscriber. Any suggestions?
LikeLike
Ben, if you happen to have access to a university library system, you can probably access the article electronically through the library’s electronic publications system.
LikeLike
I changed the link.
See if the new one works.
LikeLike
Here is the new link: I changed the article and inserted it: http://roundtheinkwell.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/more-than-just-test-scores-sept2012-2.pdf
LikeLike
It’s even worse than that, Diane. Since the tests measure something that only narrowly can be called cognitive, and the other qualities mentioned also are not “just” affect–but involve the way the brain interprets the world–which is cognitive. Like “academic”, the word “cognitive” can be very slippery.
LikeLike
When I was studying for my MA in Teaching, I took a seminar called History of Education. We spent some time on the use of IQ tests around 1900. The tests had two draconian purposes: to “track” students into either vocational or college-prep curricula and to screen immigrants coming to Ellis Island. The tests were of course in English, which penalized many immigrants and children of immigrants, and culturally biased. But at the time they were perceived by politicians and even educators to be a “scientific” measure of a person’s intelligence.
IQ test scores were an example of reification, our professor explained. The number was no longer a test score, but seen as an intrinsic measure of one’s intelligence. In other words, IQ = “intelligence” and a “low IQ” meant a child was denied access to higher educaiton and an immigrant was denied entry to the USA.
A parallel reification is happening now, with all this “values-added” ballyhoo. Students’ test scores are a measure of one’s teaching ability — the only measure.
LikeLike
Thanks for the link Dr. Ravitch! This shows how the tunnel vision of test obsession overlooks important ways we can help students if we teachers have the time to form relationships with them. We can’t do that with the Gates et al model of one “great” teacher and many students. Stack them deep and teach them cheap only exacerbates the problem.
LikeLike
Thanks for pointing this out. I use it here: http://academeblog.org/2012/09/08/testing-the-parent-of-cheating/
LikeLike
[…] the past week, both Joe Nocera of the NYTimes and Diane Ravitch wrote about non-cognitive skills, basing their writing on two different sources— evidence […]
LikeLike