Joseph Herbert teaches math at Wilson High School in the District of Columbia. In this post, he explains how PARCC, the Common Core test, hurt his students. He supports the Common Core but not the tests.
He writes that the current “reforms” are deeply flawed.
“The problem is two-fold: (1) the data collected do not reliably give us the information that reformers claim they do, and (2) the over-emphasis on testing is sucking the life and joy out of school, interfering significantly with actual teaching and learning, and narrowing the curriculum.”
VAM, he says, is unreliable and invalid, as is the data it produces.
Students lost many weeks of instructional time because of testing:
“Our freshmen and sophomores took over seven hours worth of PARCC tests in the month of March alone. Furthermore, they had a second round of PARCC tests in May followed shortly thereafter by final exams in June. Ultimately, these children had three out of the last four months of school dominated by tests.
“Previously, all students took the paper-and-pencil DC-CAS standardized test at the same time, and instruction was disrupted for about a week. With the new PARCC test, there was a much more protracted disruption to instruction. The PARCC test is administered online, but Wilson simply does not have the technological infrastructure to test large numbers of students simultaneously. Without the necessary IT infrastructure we were forced to test small groups of students on a rotating basis.
“As a result, we spent over three weeks administering the first round of PARCC tests alone. Students were forced to miss class to test while their classes went on, causing them to lose valuable instructional time.”
He does not blame the Common Core standards. He blames PARCC. To those who think we need annual testing, he points out that NAEP reports the gaps every two years, without the intrusiveness of PARCC.
He writes:
“Ultimately, we have to ask ourselves what kind of experience we want our children to have in school. I believe that kids learn more when they’re excited to come to school. I believe they learn more when they have meaningful and thoughtful questions to ask and answer. I believe math can and should be fun.
“I believe that if we want to stem the tide of DC’s dropout crisis, school should be a worthwhile place to attend, not a miserable experience of test taking.
“I believe that if we want to close the achievement gap, we need to have an open and honest conversation about what students need from school, what they want from school, and how we can get data on student performance without perversely affecting their school experience.
“Most of all, I believe that school is a place for profound growth and learning. Anything that detracts from or actively impedes that must go.”
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Yes, read that article and my comments below it. Note especially the article from Science that shows the act of taking a test is one of the most effective ways to learn information. The article has some good points but is disingenuous overall.
Virginiasgp,
Yes it is tedious to respond to the same specious claims over and over from a man with zero background as a teacher, researcher, or scholar. Did you know that the Board on Testing and Assessment of the National Academy of Sciences warned Duncan that VAM was unreliable for judging individual teachers?
I am still waiting for you to tell me about another nation that uses VAM.
Virginiasgp – Diane’s question was a softball – on a tee.
Why didn’t you knock it out of the park?
Let me take a swing:
ZERO countries are using VAM (other than the the US) to evaluate teachers. None, nada, zilch.
Which begs the question: if VAM is such an effective instrument for measuring teacher effectiveness, then why isn’t any other country taking advantage of it’s wonderful metrics?
Virginiasgp,
“the article from Science that shows the act of taking a test is one of the most effective ways to learn information.”
Do you have a reference for that article? If so would you please post it? TIA!!
As far as “testing” being one of the most effective ways to learn information, I think it would be better said “self-quizzing” with writing answers down and self checking them. If the object is to memorize that is, and I certainly believe it is a necessary skill to develop the ability to self quiz and memorize information.
So it’s not necessarily “taking a test” that is the key, that is a different skill set from quizzing oneself.
He linked it in the linked article. It’s a very typical article from a popular science magazine – overly simplified, nuance free. I’m sure the original study(ies) on which the article was based was/were a lot more nuanced.
The biggest problem I see is that they define “learning” as simply being able to regurgitate information. The relevance of the information, the ability to understand concepts and the ability to use the information/concepts to actually do anything are all irrelevant. I guess the “Rainman” would be a genius because he could memorize the telephone book.
I’ve taken the ACT, GRE, GMAT, Praxis, Compass, Driver’s License, and an online quiz that told me what Game of Thrones character I am. If tests accelerate learning, I should be a genius. Then how come I still can’t find my car keys?
Tests strive to measure learning, not deliver knowledge. If you are depending on tests for your learning needs, you remind me of my college buddy who never studied, but crammed with a six pack for exams. But thanks for the laugh.
The best way to learn is having to teach something to someone else. The students teaching students is a highly effective technique for the right kids.. Our district’s school lets students design and teach classes under the guidance of a veteran teacher. Those kids really work to be prepared in front of their peers. Next comes doing or actually having to apply what you learn. I can study a programming language all day long, but writing an actual program solidifies the learning.
You are calling Science a “popular science magazine“? Seriously? It’s one of the top scientific journals in the world for peer-reviewed research.
I’m not suggesting that students should only “take tests” to learn, but this notion that taking tests is so harmful is ridiculous. There needs to be a combination of multiple ways of learning. But this notion that all we need is “project based learning” (PBL) is crazy. There is a reason it took Newton (one of the smartest individuals ever) years to develop calculus but our students can learn the core of it within a year. Learning via direct instruction is much simpler than deriving or discovering. But we cannot know how much they retain without some form of testing. This notion that testing is harmful to students is silly.
MathVale,
Please don’t knock the value of tests for learning.
I took a drug test once to get a job working for an R&D company that does government contracts and learned two very important things in the process:
1) how to pee in a cup
2) that I had not been using any drugs
QED
“Learning via direct instruction is much simpler than deriving or discovering.”
Ah, yes, simplicity. The kissing cousin of efficiency. If only the world were simple. Direct instruction may be “simpler”, but ultimately it’s not terribly useful. People only retain information in a usable format that is relevant to their experience and interesting to them. Otherwise they forget most of it as soon as the test is over, and what they do retain they can’t really use unless they go on Jeopardy! or play Trivial Pursuit. You can argue that everyone should know the states and capitals or the presidents in chronological order or the periodic table or whatever, and perhaps they should. But the reality is that very few jobs or other life tasks require such knowledge and those that do people usually memorize that information from constant use, not from “direct instruction”.
Anyway, Science may be a respectable magazine, but, yes, it’s still a popular magazine. Peer reviewed research is originally presented in journals specific to individual fields, such as the Journal of Abnormal Psychology or the Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. Science is a collection and review of such journal articles across many scientific disciplines aimed at the educated lay person.
“Then how come I still can’t find my car keys?”
Because you forgot to look under the lamp post where the light is.
Thanks Duane! I found them!
virginiasgp, I am not sure you are responding to my post, but here goes. I do not believe tests are harmful. Tests have diagnostic value if interpreted by a skilled teacher. But the over-reliance on tests by Reformrs is ignoring the fact the tests are flawed, subject to error , imprecise and inconsistent.
Leibniz might contest giving all the credit to Newton, but, yes, Newton was brilliant, except for his foray into alchemy, maybe. My favorite Newton quote goes something like “if I can see clearly, it is because I stand on the shoulders of giants”. Newton believed in conjecture, proof, and rational thinking. He understood that his accomplishments were the careful culmination of those that achieved before him.
In contrast, the Reform movement is an irrational, scorched-earth insanity ignoring evidence and dismissing the giants that have come before us. Reformers seek to destroy rather than build, a much easier endeavor. It is much harder to take what you have and incrementally improve. That takes effort.
BTW, To learn The Calculus takes years of study of algebra, trig, etc. A high school year of The Calculus is a toe in the water. It is a fascinating subject. Mathematics teaches a way of thinking. To learn to think means you need to interact with humans and use that thought process transferred to other problems. A test is a feeble, very feeble, attempt to reflect how we think.
In real life, tests ARE portfolios of work. When I was working in tech, if I would go to my supervisor and say “I can’t solve the customer’s problem, but I did great on my college ACT”, I’d be lucky to get a box to pack up my things.
Tell me and I’ll forget.
Show me and I may remember
Involve me and I’ll learn.
Students learn best when
information is
interesting,
meaningful,
surprising,
and
thought provoking
If school is boring – it is very hard to learn.
Why kids forget what we teach them. An excerpt from the linked article:
‘Given that you cannot store everything away, your memory system lays its bets: if you think about something carefully [and repeatedly) you’ll probably have to think about it again, so it should be stored. If you don’t think about something very much, then you probably wont want to think about it again, so it need not be stored. Your memory is a product of what you think most carefully about. What students think about most carefully is what they will remember.’
So, why might students forget things they’ve been taught? Willingham suggests a number of reasons:
Attention: you can’t remember things you haven’t paid sustained attention to in working memory.
Storage: you have paid attention, but it hasn’t made it into long-term memory – it never struck.
Usage: you can’t remember things that no longer reside in long-term memory – they have faded through disuse.
Transfer: your process by which things are drawn from long-term memory is prone to failure: transfer is difficult, because it’s difficult to apply abstractions to new situations.
In short, we don’t remember things because of insufficient focus, time or attention spent on them, and because of insufficient practice, usage, revisiting, consolidation or application.
So, when we grumble as teachers that students don’t use punctuation properly, even though they’ve learned it, we need to ask ourselves: have they really learned it? Have we really taught it with sufficient time, focus and attention? Have we sufficiently revisited it? Have we consolidated it in their minds? Have they mastered it? Have they automated it in their long-term memories?
So how can we help students remember what they’ve learned?
Willingham makes some suggestions:
1. Distributing practice (rather than cramming): ‘it is virtually impossible to become proficient at any mental task without extended, dedicated practice distributed over time.’
2. Overlearning: keep pupils learning after they know the material to prevent forgetting: ‘a good rule of thumb is to put in another 20 percent of the time it took to master the material’.
3. Testing frequently: testing students frequently helps them remember material.
https://pragmaticreform.wordpress.com/2013/11/16/memory/
My request goes unanswered. Do you have a link to the article.
Here’s a link to an NYT article talking about the Science article: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/21/science/21memory.html?_r=1 The Science article is linked in the NYT article.
Thanks, Dienne!
Yes, thanks. It appears the study calls a “test” as interpreting a passage with an essay. In other words applying and critically thinking about an issue. And the main contrast, besides the control group, was concept mapping. It is a huge leap (which fallacy is that?) to insist that this means standardized testing and VAM are therefore completely valid in education. All this study demonstrates is there is more than one approach to learning, something teachers already know.