International test scores have been used by reformers like Arne Duncan, Jeb Bush, Joel Klein, and Michelle Rhee as a fear tactic. During the 2016 presidential campaign, you will surely hear much wailing and gnashing of the teeth about how our scores on international tests are undermining our global competitiveness and economic growth.
Horsefeathers!
Here is a post that I wrote in 2013; I updated it. It explains why those international test scores don’t matter, except to tell us that if we really wanted to raise them, we would reduce poverty. Let me say that again: if we reduced poverty, we would have higher scores on international tests.
“The news reports say that the test scores of American students on the latest PISA test are “stagnant,” “lagging,” “flat,” etc.
The U.S. Department of Education would have us believe–yet again–that we are in an unprecedented crisis and that we must double down on the test-and-punish strategies of the past dozen years.
The myth persists that once our nation led the world on international tests, but we have fallen from that exalted position in recent years.
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
Here is the background history that you need to know to interpret the PISA score release, as well as Secretary Duncan’s calculated effort to whip up national hysteria about our standing in the international league tables.
The U.S. has NEVER been first in the world, nor even near the top, on international tests.
Over the past half century, our students have typically scored at or near the median, or even in the bottom quartile. And yet during this same period, we grew to be one of the most powerful economies in the world. How could that be?
International testing began in the mid-1960s with a test of mathematics. The First International Mathematics Study tested 13-year-olds and high-school seniors in 12 nations. American 13-year-olds scored significantly lower than students in nine other countries and ahead of students in only one. On a test given only to students currently enrolled in a math class, the U.S. students scored last, behind those in the 11 other nations. On a test given to seniors not currently enrolled in a math class, the U.S. students again scored last.
The First International Science Study was given in the late 1960s and early 1970s to 10-year-olds, 14-year-olds, and seniors. The 10-year-olds did well, scoring behind only the Japanese; the 14-year-olds were about average. Among students in the senior year of high school, Americans scored last of eleven school systems.
In the Second International Mathematics Study (1981-82), students in 15 systems were tested. The students were 13-year-olds and seniors. The younger group of U.S. students placed at or near the median on most tests. The American seniors placed at or near the bottom on almost every test. The “average Japanese students achieved higher than the top 5% of the U.S. students in college preparatory mathematics” and “the algebra achievement of our most able students (the top 1%) was lower than that of the top 1% of any other country.” (The quote is from Curtis C. McKnight and others, The Underachieving Curriculum: Assessing U.S. Mathematics from an International Perspective, pp. 17, 26-27). I summarized the international assessments from the mid-1960s to the early 1990s in a book called National Standards in American Education: A Citizen’s Guide (Brookings, 1995).
The point worth noting here is that U.S. students have never been top performers on the international tests. We are doing about the same now on PISA as we have done for the past half century.
Does it matter?
In my last book, Reign of Error, I quote extensively from a brilliant article by Keith Baker, called “Are International Tests Worth Anything?,” which was published by Phi Delta Kappan in October 2007. Baker, who worked for many years as a researcher at the U.S. Department of Education, had the ingenious idea to investigate what happened to the 12 nations that took the First International Mathematics test in 1964. He looked at the per capita gross domestic product of those nations and found that “the higher a nation’s test score 40 years ago, the worse its economic performance on this measure of national wealth–the opposite of what the Chicken Littles raising the alarm over the poor test scores of U.S. children claimed would happen.” He found no relationship between a nation’s economic productivity and its test scores. Nor did the test scores bear any relationship to quality of life or democratic institutions. And when it came to creativity, the U.S. “clobbered the world,” with more patents per million people than any other nation.
Baker wrote that a certain level of educational achievement may be “a platform for launching national success, but once that platform is reached, other factors become more important than further gains in test scores. Indeed, once the platform is reached, it may be bad policy to pursue further gains in test scores because focusing on the scores diverts attention, effort, and resources away from other factors that are more important determinants of national success.” What has mattered most for the economic, cultural, and technological success of the U.S., he says, is a certain “spirit,” which he defines as “ambition, inquisitiveness, independence, and perhaps most important, the absence of a fixation on testing and test scores.”
Baker’s conclusion was that “standings in the league tables of international tests are worthless.”
I agree with Baker. The more we focus on tests, the more we kill creativity, ingenuity, and the ability to think differently. Students who think differently get lower scores. The more we focus on tests, the more we reward conformity and compliance, getting the right answer.
Thirty-two years ago, a federal report called “A Nation at Risk” warned that we were in desperate trouble because of the poor academic performance of our students. The report was written by a distinguished commission, appointed by the Secretary of Education. The commission pointed to those dreadful international test scores and complained that “on 19 academic tests American students were never first or second and, in comparison with other industrialized nations, were last seven times.” With such terrible outcomes, the commission said, “the educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a Nation and a people.” Yet we are still here, apparently the world’s most dominant economy. We still are a “Nation and a people.” What were they thinking? Go figure.
Despite having been proved wrong for the past half century, the Bad News Industry is in full cry, armed with the PISA scores, expressing alarm, fright, fear, and warnings of imminent economic decline and collapse.
Never do they explain how it was possible for the U.S. to score so poorly on international tests again and again over the past half century and yet still emerge as the world’s leading economy, with the world’s most vibrant culture, and a highly productive workforce.
From my vantage point as a historian, here is my takeaway from the PISA scores:
Lesson 1: If they mean anything at all, the PISA scores show the failure of the past thirteen years of public policy in the United States. The billions invested in testing, test prep, and accountability have not raised test scores or our nation’s relative standing on the league tables. No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top are manifest failures at accomplishing their singular goal of higher test scores.
Lesson 2: The PISA scores burst the bubble of the alleged “Florida miracle” touted by Jeb Bush. Florida was one of three states–Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Florida–that participated in the PISA testing. Massachusetts did very well, typically scoring above the OECD average and the US average, as you might expect of the nation’s highest performing state on NAEP. Connecticut also did well. But Florida did not do well at all. It turns out that the highly touted “Florida model” of testing, accountability, and choice was not competitive, if you are inclined to take the scores seriously. In math, Florida performed below the OECD average and below the U.S. average. In science, Florida performed below the OECD average and at the U.S. average. In reading, Massachusetts and Connecticut performed above both the OECD and U.S. average, but Florida performed at average for both.
Lesson 3: Improving the quality of life for the nearly one-quarter of students who live in poverty–and the 51% who live in low-income families– would improve their academic performance. If we had less poverty, we would have higher test scores.
Lesson 4: We measure only what can be measured. We measure whether students can pick the right answer to a test question. But what we cannot measure matters more. The scores tell us nothing about students’ imagination, their drive, their ability to ask good questions, their insight, their inventiveness, their creativity. If we continue the policies of the Bush and Obama administrations in education, we will not only NOT get higher scores (the Asian nations are so much better at this than we are), but we will crush the very qualities that have given our nation its edge as a cultivator of new talent and new ideas for many years.
The fact is that during the past 13 years of high-stakes testing, American scores on the PISA exam have not budged at all. If anything, they have slipped a few points. Test and punish failed! No Child Left Behind failed! Race to the Top failed! Who shall we hold accountable? George W. Bush? His advisor Sandy Kress? Secretary of Education Rod Paige and Margaret Spellings? Barack Obama? Arne Duncan? Congress? They forced states and districts to spend billions of dollars on testing, and all of this testing didn’t move the needle on the PISA tests. What if those billions had been spent instead to reduce class sizes? To provide health clinics for schools in poor communities? To create jobs? We need a new approach, and sadly, our policymakers continue to push the same failed ideas. The fact is that we have intolerably high levels of child poverty, and children who are poor register the lowest test scores. There is a simple but obvious formula: Reducing poverty will lift test scores.
Higher test scores should not be our national goal. Healthy, imaginative, curious children should be. Rather than focusing on test scores, I prefer to bet on the creative, can-do spirit of the American people, on its character, persistence, ambition, hard work, and big dreams, none of which are ever measured or can be measured by standardized tests like PISA.

Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Texas Education.
LikeLike
International Scores have been used in various ways – some of which are described above. Another way they have been used is to point to Finland as a country the US should emulate. Some of us have pointed out that both Massachusetts & Minnesota, similar in many ways to Finland, have higher scores on International Tests.
Neither state is perfect, but if we are going to use test scores to recommend the Finnish approach, we also ought to look at what US states that do better than Finland on this tests are doing.
I think we should be using multiple measures, and learning from a variety of successful schools, whether they are in Finland, other countries or the US.
LikeLike
The use of PISA for a reductio ad absurdum argument seems perfectly valid. Assume standardized tests like PISA are the means to a quality education system, then point to Finland. The Finnish barely acknowledge these tests and focus on actual learning and supporting the teaching profession.
LikeLike
Should be required reading for all policymakers and legislators. PISA scoresa are further proof that cherry-picking can be convenient but it always denies a view of the big picture.
Race to the Top, by its very name, was and is an attempt to manipulate better test scores internationally. Nothing more. The policymakers believed that by making EVERYTHING about test scores they could squeeze blood from a stone.
I guess I don’t understand where this comes from. Do they think that teachers are holding back those golden lesson plans until their jobs are threatened? Let’s face it, there is no reward for achieving the policymaker’s goals. Teachers simply get to keep what they have.
All must worship at the altar of the test!
LikeLike
If I may correct your one sentence: “PISA scoresa are further proof that STANDARDIZED TEST SCORES ARE COMPLETELY INVALID AND ANY RESULTS ARE ‘VAIN AND ILLUSORY’. “
LikeLike
“PISA”
The key to our success
Is not on PISA test
So looking there
Will never bare
The answer to our quest
LikeLike
“The Leaning Tower of PISA”
Rigor is de rigueur
Testing is the norm
PISA is the figure
By which they gauge reform
LikeLike
The faith in testing is absolute. You really have to read the claims from the CC testing companies to understand the extent to which these tests are being over-sold:
“#PARCC will broaden teaching repertoire and help Ss’ learn more about how technology can help them in every subject ”
It’s all like that. Broad, declarative claims and it’s all opinion or conjecture, because of course they don’t know what PARCC “will” do. There’s no room for any criticism or debate at all.
“PARCC will”…. I’m not a scientist but I’m fairly confident declaring the results of an experiment before the first round of the experiment is completed isn’t science.
https://twitter.com/PARCCplace
LikeLike
I know that Twitter is only 140 characters, but did you notice the ONE word that was abbreviated in these tweets? STUDENTS! No abbreviation of repertoire or technology, but students is abbreviated. I think that sums it up as far as Pearson and these other testing companies are concerned. Students are an afterthought.
LikeLike
The other thing that sums up PARCC’s goal ($$) perhaps subconsciously is the web address “PARCCplace”!!
Either the folks who make up the PARCC consortium do not understand irony or they are simply thumbing their nose at the rest of us.
LikeLike
When (not if, but when) schools and the public over-rely on a single test score and rank kids on the Common Core C 1-5 or 1-4 testing scale it will be directly due to these promoters over-selling these tests.
They can’t credibly tell people they don’t rely exclusively on test scores WHILE relying exclusively on test scores. They are selling these tests as determinative. People will thus (understandably!) interpret the scores as determinative.
LikeLike
It’s actually the antithesis of science: drawing the conclusions and making the claims before one has the evidence — and then presumably cherry picking and doing other data manipulation afterward to “prove” the original claims.
This pattern has been repeated with growing (and frightening) frequency in the US in recent times (not just on education “reform”, but on climate change and other issues as well)
Disregard for and outright rejection of science by those in power bodes very ill for the future of our country
LikeLike
It’s hysterical. The Common Core is already a huge success and the tens of millions of experimental subjects haven’t even turned in their first round of tests yet!
This is what happens when lawmakers “relinquish” their role and responsibility to private companies. We get advertising instead of information.
LikeLike
No legitimate scientist or engineer or would ever approach a project the way that “reformers” like David Coleman have approached the development of education standards (Common Core).
If Boeing built their airplanes this way they would never leave the ground because someone at Boeing named David Coleman (no relation) would have built the whole plane before a single component had been tested — to say nothing of before competent subject matter experts following a proven specification and design process had produced a feasible model (eg, one with wings)
Reformer David Coleman is about as knowledgeable about developing education ELA standards as his apocryphal namesake at Boeing is about aeronautical engineering (read what Bob Shepherd –an actual ELA expert — has to say about David Coleman and his “baby”(you’ll need to watch Eraserhead to know what that refers to)
LikeLike
Chiara,
You like that word “relinquish”, don’t you?
It is a very good word.
By the way, don’t know if you have seen it, but (with some help from Shakespeare) Bob Shepherd has put together some very good words for David Coleman here
LikeLike
Great post, Diane. But why did you not also mention your report of the recent discovery by two German researchers that the OECD deliberately designed the PISA to destroy local cultures by using PISA scores to cow countries into following the OECD’s globalized economic vision?
That paper suggests that the PISA is being used exactly as planned by the reformers, and that the reformers care nothing about education but are trying to engineer our society to their whim.
LikeLike
Please provide a link or some other way for me to learn more about this.
LikeLike
LikeLike
Thank you. I will pass this along.
LikeLike
Thanks. I’ve been trying with little success the past few months.
LikeLike
All of your points need to be restated again and again. You are doing that. The standard stories in the press are like the dolls where you pull a string and the same message is heard, test scores are down or flat, must raise these, etc.etc.
Robert Linn ( ex president of the American Educational Research Association) and some colleagues discovered that the PISA test scores reflect curricula and cultural values that honor the ability to follow directions–a cultural value–with this aided by the same language spoken at home and in school. (Reference not on by iPad but available.) It is worth noting that any discussion of test scores is a Catch 22 in that any refutation of their real importance makes them seem to be important after all. It is the Venus fly trap, or Lakoff’s “Don’t Think of an Elephant” problem. But, your summary is excellent. The policies designed to raise test scores to the exclusion of virtually every thing else are wrong, and the spillover effects are not only doing damage to this generation, required to think there is a single right answer to every problem, but to the institution of public education.
LikeLike
Tests only measure what is on the test. To assume these tests measure actual learning is far from established, even if learning could be well defined. Your post is a great summary of why PISA does not, and cannot, measure every important aspect of education.
LikeLike
“Tests only measure what is on the test.”
No, the test measures nothing. It is not a measuring device, it may be an assessment device. Big difference. The number correct/incorrect on a test is not a measurement but a count (and I’m not talking about Count von Count).
Such a simple fact that most people don’t understand-ay ay ay . Either that or it’s just bad usage of the language.
LikeLike
In a certain kind of conservative political narrative, those (lower) test scores are actually used as an excuse to not address poverty. The narrative I encounter from time to time is that “we have poverty because we have a crappy education system. If we fix the education system, then we’ll solve poverty.”
LikeLike
wdf1: Begin with the premise that every child, regardless of where he or she lives, should have an excellent education, the best we know how to provide. Test prep ain’t it. How about providing, in every neighborhood, schools with wonderful arts programs, with beautiful facilities, with activities and studies that rival the best private schools. Even then, we will still have poverty, not because of the schools, but because of the economy. We need federal and state policy to rebuild our infrastructure and create jobs. That will reduce poverty and improve education too.
LikeLike
“We measure only what can be measured. We measure whether students can pick the right answer to a test question. But what we cannot measure matters more. The scores tell us nothing about students’ imagination, their drive, their ability to ask good questions, their insight, their inventiveness, their creativity.”
We don’t “measure whether students can pick the right answer. . . “. We COUNT the number of correct answers and ASSUME (there is no logical basis for that assumption) that it is a “measure”. Counting is not measuring.
But you are quite correct in saying/repeating “. . . what we cannot measure matters moreMOST.”
LikeLike
To answer the question of the post:
ABSOLUTAMENTE NADA.
To understand why read and comprehend Noel Wilson’s complete destruction of the concepts and usage of educational standards and standardized testing in his never refuted nor rebutted “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” found at: http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/577/700
Brief outline of Wilson’s “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” and some comments of mine. (updated 6/24/13 per Wilson email)
1. A description of a quality can only be partially quantified. Quantity is almost always a very small aspect of quality. It is illogical to judge/assess a whole category only by a part of the whole. The assessment is, by definition, lacking in the sense that “assessments are always of multidimensional qualities. To quantify them as unidimensional quantities (numbers or grades) is to perpetuate a fundamental logical error” (per Wilson). The teaching and learning process falls in the logical realm of aesthetics/qualities of human interactions. In attempting to quantify educational standards and standardized testing the descriptive information about said interactions is inadequate, insufficient and inferior to the point of invalidity and unacceptability.
2. A major epistemological mistake is that we attach, with great importance, the “score” of the student, not only onto the student but also, by extension, the teacher, school and district. Any description of a testing event is only a description of an interaction, that of the student and the testing device at a given time and place. The only correct logical thing that we can attempt to do is to describe that interaction (how accurately or not is a whole other story). That description cannot, by logical thought, be “assigned/attached” to the student as it cannot be a description of the student but the interaction. And this error is probably one of the most egregious “errors” that occur with standardized testing (and even the “grading” of students by a teacher).
3. Wilson identifies four “frames of reference” each with distinct assumptions (epistemological basis) about the assessment process from which the “assessor” views the interactions of the teaching and learning process: the Judge (think college professor who “knows” the students capabilities and grades them accordingly), the General Frame-think standardized testing that claims to have a “scientific” basis, the Specific Frame-think of learning by objective like computer based learning, getting a correct answer before moving on to the next screen, and the Responsive Frame-think of an apprenticeship in a trade or a medical residency program where the learner interacts with the “teacher” with constant feedback. Each category has its own sources of error and more error in the process is caused when the assessor confuses and conflates the categories.
4. Wilson elucidates the notion of “error”: “Error is predicated on a notion of perfection; to allocate error is to imply what is without error; to know error it is necessary to determine what is true. And what is true is determined by what we define as true, theoretically by the assumptions of our epistemology, practically by the events and non-events, the discourses and silences, the world of surfaces and their interactions and interpretations; in short, the practices that permeate the field. . . Error is the uncertainty dimension of the statement; error is the band within which chaos reigns, in which anything can happen. Error comprises all of those eventful circumstances which make the assessment statement less than perfectly precise, the measure less than perfectly accurate, the rank order less than perfectly stable, the standard and its measurement less than absolute, and the communication of its truth less than impeccable.”
In other word all the logical errors involved in the process render any conclusions invalid.
5. The test makers/psychometricians, through all sorts of mathematical machinations attempt to “prove” that these tests (based on standards) are valid-errorless or supposedly at least with minimal error [they aren’t]. Wilson turns the concept of validity on its head and focuses on just how invalid the machinations and the test and results are. He is an advocate for the test taker not the test maker. In doing so he identifies thirteen sources of “error”, any one of which renders the test making/giving/disseminating of results invalid. And a basic logical premise is that once something is shown to be invalid it is just that, invalid, and no amount of “fudging” by the psychometricians/test makers can alleviate that invalidity.
6. Having shown the invalidity, and therefore the unreliability, of the whole process Wilson concludes, rightly so, that any result/information gleaned from the process is “vain and illusory”. In other words start with an invalidity, end with an invalidity (except by sheer chance every once in a while, like a blind and anosmic squirrel who finds the occasional acorn, a result may be “true”) or to put in more mundane terms crap in-crap out.
7. And so what does this all mean? I’ll let Wilson have the second to last word: “So what does a test measure in our world? It measures what the person with the power to pay for the test says it measures. And the person who sets the test will name the test what the person who pays for the test wants the test to be named.”
In other words it attempts to measure “’something’ and we can specify some of the ‘errors’ in that ‘something’ but still don’t know [precisely] what the ‘something’ is.” The whole process harms many students as the social rewards for some are not available to others who “don’t make the grade (sic)” Should American public education have the function of sorting and separating students so that some may receive greater benefits than others, especially considering that the sorting and separating devices, educational standards and standardized testing, are so flawed not only in concept but in execution?
My answer is NO!!!!!
One final note with Wilson channeling Foucault and his concept of subjectivization:
“So the mark [grade/test score] becomes part of the story about yourself and with sufficient repetitions becomes true: true because those who know, those in authority, say it is true; true because the society in which you live legitimates this authority; true because your cultural habitus makes it difficult for you to perceive, conceive and integrate those aspects of your experience that contradict the story; true because in acting out your story, which now includes the mark and its meaning, the social truth that created it is confirmed; true because if your mark is high you are consistently rewarded, so that your voice becomes a voice of authority in the power-knowledge discourses that reproduce the structure that helped to produce you; true because if your mark is low your voice becomes muted and confirms your lower position in the social hierarchy; true finally because that success or failure confirms that mark that implicitly predicted the now self evident consequences. And so the circle is complete.”
In other words students “internalize” what those “marks” (grades/test scores) mean, and since the vast majority of the students have not developed the mental skills to counteract what the “authorities” say, they accept as “natural and normal” that “story/description” of them. Although paradoxical in a sense, the “I’m an “A” student” is almost as harmful as “I’m an ‘F’ student” in hindering students becoming independent, critical and free thinkers. And having independent, critical and free thinkers is a threat to the current socio-economic structure of society.
LikeLike
A question for all:
What early 20th century “science” does psychometrics resemble?
A. Blood letting
B. Eugenics
C. Phrenology
D. Copernican Astronomy
LikeLike
Is that a PARCC question?
Nothing better than a self-referential test.
LikeLike
Just practicing for an interview with Pearson!
LikeLike
Duane Swacker, Pearson mole extraordinaire.
Maybe you can sneak in a few questions taken from Noel Wilson
Of course, you will have to adopt a pseudonym if you expect to get a job there.
You can use mine: SomeDAM Poet. That should get you a job for sure, especially after I gave this plug for them
Pearson Testing to the tomb
Should be standard, from the womb
LikeLike
On second thought, better not use my pseudonym
I had forgotten that I also wrote this
“The British are Coming”
The British are Coming
They’re PARCCing in schools
The Pearson’s are drumming
We’re acting like fools
We beat them in battle
But now we surrender
They treat us like cattle
As corporate provender
and this
“State Sponsored Test Standards”
Carefully crafted was the scheme
That subjugates the local theme
And makes it answer to the Fed
Which rolls with Pearson in the bed
and this
“Pearson’s Eyes and Ears”
School officials are eyes and ears
For Pearson, whom the district fears
They listen in for student chat
About the test, and punish that
and this
Principled principals we applaud
Who won’t appease the testing god
Who will not bend and will not bow
To Pearson and their test cash-cow
LikeLike
and this
“Opt out”
Opt out of the testing
Deny them student data
Arrest their test investing
“Pearson, see ya lata”
and this
“Test Integrity”
“Integrity of Pearson Test”
Is oxymoron at its best
To test a standard that is junk
Is nothing more than purest bunk
and this
“Pearsonal Testing Renaissance”
A Renaissance of testing
Enlightenment of torture
A culture of molesting
With reason of a vulture
No, definitely better not use my pseudonym
LikeLike
though, I did also write the following to commiserate with Pearson upon the inevitable occasion of their loss
It was sad when the Common Core went down (to the bottom of the….)
Duncans and Rhees, Pearson testing lost their fees.
It was sad when the Common Core went down.
LikeLike
Incidentally, I just finished “A DAMthology of Deform”, which makes it easy to search for this stuff.
LikeLike
A) I am going with bloodletting despite the fact that it predates the 20th Century.
LikeLike
PISA tests are just feeding the gullibles who know absolutely nothing about education but have an absolute power to control education. And some of those gullibles also believe they are capable of fixing the problems addressed repetitively by critics at home and abroad. They particularly respond to international media because they are pretty much obsessed with national image in international community. Like Japanese education minister Hakubun Shimomura makes a pathetic response to NYT article on Japan’s divided education policy: 1)”We are not divided.Jpanese schools are not teaching traditional values enough to children enough.” 2) we are not doing well in English because we don’t fully utilize the exams designed by external private organizations!” Just like that. That’s what education minister of nation that ranks top 5 in PISA tests. Similar to Duncan and Bush.
LikeLike
There’s yet another Gates-funded ed reform media platform:
“Bright hopes to change the tenor of the conversation. In response to the incessant anger and dismay about how our children are learning, we will bring a rigorous solutions-oriented outlook to the most contentious topics in education today.”
Now that billionaire philanthropists are running US public schools because our feckless and corrupt political leaders have “relinquished” public education,, the same philanthropists have graciously decided to allow the public to “debate” the policies they’ve already enacted.
View at Medium.com
LikeLike
Thanks for updating this! I admit to having the original article from 2013 saved on my hard drive.
I have always marveled at the fact that we, as a society rarely ask the follow up question. We are told that our students score poorly on international assessments and not only do we accept that the metric is important and valid, but our American Exceptionalism allows us to blindly assume that at one point we were at the top of the assessment pool. It never occurs to anyone to investigate the assumptions that are made.
LikeLike
Just consider a few intractable problems like differences in school systems [yeah, all the complications that come from different cultures and subject pacing and goals and emphasis], language [see the eminent psychometrician Howard Wainer on this], and gaming the numbers because the numbers & stats derived from test scores are high-stakes [sorry, all you Raj Chetty fanboys and fangirls, Campbell’s Law rears its inconvenient head again]…
But let’s focus. Howzabout a teensy weensy bit of reality correction on those projecting Rheeality Distortion Fields on themselves [above all!] and on us in order to achieve mathematical intimidation and obfuscation.
A NATION AT RISK. 1983. As deftly explained by the late Gerald Bracey, READING EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH: HOW TO AVOID GETTING STATISTICALLY SNOOKERED (2006, pp. 24-26):
[start excerpts]
“There was a steady decline in science achievement scores of U.S. 17-year-olds as measured by national assessments in 1969, 1973, and 1977.” This is probably true. We can’t say more than “probably” because the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) was not initially designed to provide longitudinal data, in spite of the presence of the word progress in its name. In 1977, NAEP officials decided that such trend data would be useful, and the 1973 and 1969 results were recalculated using only the items those two assessments had in common with the 1977 assessment. Thus the data points the commissioners saw were backward extrapolations in time using only some of the data that had been collected in 1969 and 1973.
Beyond that, and more important, we should ask why the commissioners selected only science and why they selected only seventeen-year-olds to make their point. NAEP also tests nine- and thirteen-year-olds. NAEP also tests reading and mathematics at those three ages. So if the decline is widespread and awful, why weren’t the other ages and subjects included?
If we look at all nine trend lines (three subjects tested at three different ages), as shown in Figure 2, we quickly see that the science trend for seventeen-year-olds is the only one that shows a “steady decline.” It is the only one that will support the report’s crisis rhetoric and it was the only one mentioned. (Terrell Bell, the secretary of education who commissioned A Nation at Risk, was quite candid in his memoir The Thirteenth Man about how he had hear many stories about the terrible state of public schools and had convened the commission to document the stories.)
[end excerpts]
(special formatting such as italics removed as are footnote numbers)
Señor Swacker: we can’t put a figure on a quality? Ok, tell me if I’m wrong when I assert that the above example of rheephorm math is—
Intellectually dishonest. 100%. Morally bankrupt. 100%. A comfort to the comfortable and an affliction to the afflicted. 100%.
And just what drives such repugnant words and deeds?
“For greed all nature is too little.” [Lucius Annaeus Seneca]
When an old dead Greek guy isn’t available…
😎
LikeLike
Sorry KTA, but you are wrong.
You see the 100% figure that you are using is being used metaphorically and not literally. I’ve not seen any major philosophical discussion on whether a metaphor can be 100%, or 50% or 0% or even -43% but I might lean towards the last percent. There is no explanation of what are the numerator and/or denominator, in other words 100% of what??? I’m not even sure exactly which “example” you are talking about, but then again I’ve never been that good with rheephormista thinking.
LikeLike
In my defense—
David Coleman has assured me that metaphor or herbivore or carnivore or dormouse, when it comes to numerators and denominators and facts and logic, nobody gives a…
Oh my. I remember now. Nothing wrong with the ouzo last night at Pink Slip Bar & Grille. I should have paid more attention to that strangely-labeled bottle that that Paul Vallas fella [he usually sits off in a dark corner muttering to himself] left on the counter that I foolishly picked up and finished off. Kool-Aid, I think it said.
😱
What was I thinking? Obviously, I wasn’t. My bad. I owe you a round. No, make that two. And please don’t mention this to Socrates. The Greek can give a pretty good tongue lashing when he feels someone has not lived or thought rightly.
And don’t be too hard on me yourself. When I start citing David Coleman you know I am not in my right mind…
😎
LikeLike
“Out of Coleman, out of mind”
When citing David Coleman
We’re not in our right mind
Or in our left one, either
Or mind of any kind
LikeLike
Mind you, I like that…
A lot!
😎
LikeLike
Just sing two choruses of “Going out of my head” and one of Edushyster’s boxes of wine should be an adequate penance. Remember, when it comes to what David Coleman thinks, I quoted him to one of my graduate special education classes, no one with an academic bent gives a……what he thinks. We grant you absolution (perhaps with a shot of Absolut Vodka), The Greek won’t be too offended, altered states lead to awareness…..(he might buy it)
LikeLike
The problem is that we live in a society where all one needs to do to counter the argument presented here is to harumph and “sagely” assert — “Lowering poverty will raise test scores? You have it backwards — raising TEST SCORES will lower POVERTY!”
And the public will lap it up (while the checks roll in from the corporate reformers).
LikeLike
By what yardstick do you measure educational success? By test scores or by the culture which education produces?
Do we not hold our own by the number of patents produced by our alumni? By the number of Nobel prizes? Even Arne Duncan mentioned these criteria but seems incapable of defending our public schools.
Public education has been the whipping boy for political and corporate failures. I remember all too well that when sputnik went up the failure for us to fall behind the Russians in space was our public schools. It was imperative that we emulate the great Soviet school system.
Where would we be now had we done that.
AND
when we put a man on the moon did public schools get any credit for that?
Then
When our economy stagnated because our car manufactures denied the work of Deming but the Japanese did, built superior cars to Detroit’s, who got the blame:
Of course our public schools. It was imperative that we emulate the great Japanese schools which allowed their economy to boom while our economy stagnated.
How long has it been since we heard this when the Japanese economy has stagnated for decades?
Logic has long been lost replaced by a host of counterproductive philosophies and if this is allowed to continue only God knows where it will lead.
LikeLike
What do International Scores mean? Sometimes a lengthy prison sentence. Best to stick to the Netherlands if you want an International Score.
Kidding aside, I find this information interesting and it is the arguments in this post that should convince people that the test don’t tell us much. How do the reformers respond when shown these facts?
LikeLike
LikeLike
This is also a succinct explanation about how absurd focusing on these international tests is.
LikeLike