It is rare to report that any state has eliminated any standardized test at all, but that is exactly what may be about to happen in New York.
A committee of the New York Board of Regents has proposed to eliminate the “Academic Literacy Skills Test for Teachers,” which is a useless hurdle. For now, the test has been suspended. Its future will be decided in July at a meeting of the full Board of Regents.
The test was adopted in 2014. It has a disparately negative impact on minorities. But that alone is not the reason to eliminate it. It should be eliminated because it has no predictive value about good teaching.
Critics complain that the Regents are “lowering standards,” but that is nonsense.
To get a license to teach in New York State, applicants must take and pass four exams. In the contemporary mania for testing, policymakers decided that one test was not enough; two tests were not enough; three tests were not enough. No, future teachers had to take and pass four tests, all of them at the expense of those who want to teach.
The Regents, led by Regent Kathleen Cashin–a former teacher, principal, and superintendent–conducted a review of the tests. The Cashin committee concluded that the most useless of the four tests was the ALST. It is a 43-question exam that costs future teachers $118, takes about three-and-a-half hours, and has no predictive value whatever as to who will be a good teacher. Here are sample questions. Like all standardized tests, some questions have more than one right answer. If anyone can explain how this test shows the qualities of a good teacher, please let me know.
Like all standardized tests, the ALST has a disproportionately negative impact on people of color. There is a higher failure rate among blacks, Hispanics, and Asians.
If the test actually predicted who would be a good teacher, maybe the state could ignore the disparate harm to racial minorities.
But nothing about the test has any relationship to teaching. It is a test that weeds out anyone who can’t think like test makers think. It does not predict who has the knowledge and skills to teach well. It does not predict who has the sensitivity and concern to be an effective teacher for children with disabilities. It does not predict who will succeed as a teacher of students with limited English skills. It does not predict who will be successful in any kind of classroom.
Perhaps Harvard or Yale might find it to be a good substitute for the SAT, to weed out all but the most advantaged students. Perhaps law schools might find it useful to gauge reasoning skills.
But it is not a test of the skills of teachers and should be eliminated as a requirement for teaching in New York state.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
“Like all standardized tests, some questions have more than one right answer.” Not all standardized tests have more than one correct answer. A perpetual myth.
LikeLike
“Not all standardized tests have more than one correct answer.”
Standardized tests don’t have answers, correct or otherwise. Standardized tests have questions, and “some questions have more than one correct answer.”
LikeLike
Let’s not split hairs. Let’s not let hares split talking pineapples either. Standardized tests have no right answers; they have only simplifications. They are life wrongly distillate in misapplied algorithms. I encourage you to read a great post by veteran educator Peter Greene about what teaching writing is: http://curmudgucation.blogspot.com/2017/03/the-basic-unit-of-writing.html?m=1 or another one by veteran educator Marion Brady about what thinking is, posted by Valerie Strauss: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2017/03/15/why-even-the-worlds-highest-scoring-schools-need-to-change/?utm_term=.fd810c23ab7c
LikeLike
SelectPrep,
I have reviewed standardized test questions. I have seen many that have more than one right answer. I have seen some that had NO right answer.
LikeLike
If no testing is allowed, how does one apply any metric whatsoever to determine a teachers ability? Isn’t is reasonable to be able to confirm an English or Math teacher actually knows the subject if he/she is being paid to teach it?
LikeLike
Test makers don’t have the right answers. Local, democratic rule seeks to help communities find the right answers.
LikeLike
In other words, that’s what school boards hire principals– hopefully veteran educator principals– to do.
LikeLike
This test is required of all prospective teachers, regardless of the subject they will teach. This is not the only test the teachers must take. The content in this test has no bearing on the content that most teachers will be asked to teach K-12. The test has no predictive value. The content might be addressed in a collegiate humanities course or upper level art history course.
LikeLike
Tom Brown,
Prospective teachers in NewYork are required to take three other tests, including a content specialty test.
LikeLike
The test “discriminates against racial minorities”. Similar to a police force, an important determinate of a successful situation, is having community authority role models who, demographically, reflect the population. Decades ago, a test to select corporate managers, was constructed around the idea that the existing successful managers could interpret sayings like, “chomping at the bit” and “a stitch in time saves nine”. It was a bizarre and useless match to the job skills needed.
If a teaching position is in a an urban, poor neighborhood, teaching assessment should look at familiarity with the urban poor experience and language, and be coupled with proficiency in a field of study.
I presume that both Tom and I would fail the first part.
LikeLike
All teachers in NYS must take the CST – Content Subject Test – which aligns with their teaching certificte
LikeLike
As Laura said, “The content might be addressed in a collegiate humanities course or upper level art history course.” Why not just check the prospective teacher’s grade in that course? (Or not, in the case of a prospective math teacher, who also must take this test.)
There are a couple of points I take from the sample questions: (1) If it is deemed that a prospective certificate-recipient be able to hold forth on a topic, give them an essay question that relates to their field, & spend the $ to grade it. (2) If these samples are typical, the test is not germaine to teaching ability.
LikeLike
Does the “boards hire principals” then drill the prospective teacher in math or English to determine if they are qualified to teach the subject? Perhaps use flash cards in the principals office prior to hiring?
LikeLike
Hopefully, job applicants have proper degrees on their rèsumés, and perform well enough during interviews as to refrain from revealing a complete lack of knowledge about education and an irrational willingness to shoot and kill endangered species of bears. It only works when corporations and their billionaires don’t meddle in the process.
LikeLike
I’m looking at you, Pearson lobbyists.
LikeLike
You’re looking in the wrong place. I’m simply a civic minded taxpayer who had good experiences attending both public and private schools and the son of a schoolteacher. My only objective is trying to get extreme narrow minded opinionated individuals to open their eyes. And, that is a rare individual to find on this site, but I persevere.
PS: I know nothing about Pearson other than what i read on this site.
LikeLike
Tom Brown,
I appreciate your efforts to enlighten my readers, for whom you have such disdain. There are many blogs to read. Don’t feel compelled to waste your time here.
LikeLike
Tom, I didn’t mean to accuse you of working for Pearson. I appreciate your questioning of ideas. I appreciate our chance to debate ideas. This is how we do it. This is democratic education. It’s about seeking correct answers together, not choosing prefabricated answers on a computer. Thank you for your arguments, Tom.
LikeLike
Right on!
LikeLike
TB,
In a number of NJ districts, teacher candidates are asked to teach a sample lesson as part of hiring process. It’s only one snapshot in time; is an artificial experience, but it does show how the candidate approaches lesson planning and interacts with students.
Nowadays many candidates also have videos of their student teaching to submit.
LikeLike
Diane, I’m not the one with disdain. I suggest you look in a mirror and ask why you cannot tolerate any adverse opinion. So your answer to “just leave my blog”. Now that’s democracy at work.
LikeLike
Tom,
There are few rules here. One is that you don’t insult me. I’m not leaving my blog. You are.
LikeLike
Tom,
As they say here in Hollywood, California, don’t call us, we’ll call you. Ciao! Next.
LikeLike
Tom, when I completed my MS in Geology and was seeking my first job as a geologist, there was no BS (big standardized) test I took or series of tests I took that “qualified” me for my first job. I never had an employer who wanted to see “geology test” scores, or scores of tests purported to assess my knowledge of the English language, or my ability to communicate in it.
Their assumption, and a fair and logical one to be sure, was that my degrees were enough to tell them I could communicate and that my content knowledge was sufficient to begin work as a junior geologist.
Why on Earth isn’t a BA/BS and or an MA/MS sufficient for teachers? I’ll grant you that in the absence of a degree IN a specific content area some kind of content test might be needed, but other than that, why? Even I had to take a content test in geology in order to be certified to teach it, despite my two degrees in geology.
Again, why?
The lack of common sense is astounding.
LikeLike
The irony is that the people making up the content tests probably know less about the specific subjects than the people taking the tests.
Multiple choice tests in specific subjects (even the GRE subject tests) are a joke anyway. There is no way you can gauge someone’s knowledge of a subject with a multiple choice test.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I so agree with you! We had in house tests and projects galore. At the end of my Masters program there was a comprehensive test. Some write a thesis. We did student teaching with supervision. But this wasn’t enough. There was the NYC test at the time. I learned to teach by being in a classroom with the assistance and supervision of excellent supervisors/administrators. I also was given time to grow, to experiment and change. I just retired ater a total of 34 years of teaching (24 in the DOE). I stayed in the classroom all those years because I loved working with the children and I was considered to be very “effective”. No standardized test predicted this. I learned about teaching every day I was in the profession. I’m still learning. Isn’t that what education is about? A test can never measure or predict how someone is going to do their job.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Schools hire teachers, it is commonplace for committees of teachers interview and require a demonstration lesson
LikeLike
Let’s take a deep look at the real reason why states are dropping tests for prospective teachers: State governments are realizing that there is an impeding teacher shortage right around the corner. Thus, they think by making it easier to hire prospective teachers that this problem will go away. However, the reason there is an impeding teacher shortage in the first place is that the same state governments have created a hostile work culture by implementing horrible teacher evaluation procedures and destroying due process rights. Only a fool would become a teacher right now and it has nothing to do with having to pass a few tests.
LikeLike
No, Billy, you are wrong. Take the sample test and ask if you think it has anything to do with predicting who will be a good teacher.
You are right that there is a national teacher shortage, which has been created by stupid federal and state policies.
Would-be Teachers in NY already have to pass three other tests. Why not 10 or 20?
LikeLike
Maybe New York just wants to stop throwing so much money at testing companies and return those dollars to supporting educators and their classrooms. The testing obsession is wasteful and ineffective to the point of being destructive.
LikeLike
Maybe the OptOut is with them, Luke.
LikeLike
Good point Billy D. If our state education departments do not make the system more user friendly and cost friendly a.s.a.p. the teacher shortage will increase.
I have been writing and calling Gov. Cuomo for 5 years on these issues since the system is broken. It made me homeless for 3 years. But Cuomo and NYSED never respond.
LikeLike
It would be great for the Regents to eliminate the horrible new Part 154 Regulations for English Language Learners where students get absolutely no English language instruction for the middle and upper levels of proficiency. Yet, my Chinese and Russian speaking students are taking Spanish. How about we add the English language to the High School language requirement. NO. That would make too much sense.I have no faith in the Regents.
LikeLike
I just read through the revised Part 154 for Ells from the NYSED, I did not see any elimination of English. In fact, the time requirements under units of instruction are more enhanced, and the state should need many more ESL or ENL teachers. They are expecting content support for Ells as well. Perhaps districts may misinterpret what they mean by “flexibility.” I knew exactly what they meant because I taught ESL in NYS for many years. I think the flexibility in their chart refers to SIOP, sheltered instruction observation protocol, which is integrated content and language. This approach can work well if the teacher is well trained.http://www.nysed.gov/bilingual-ed/schools/units-study-tables-english-new-language-enl-and-bilingual-education-programs
LikeLike
No. The Powers that Be have determined from the mountaintop that SIOP doesn’t work. Students who are at entering or emerging (out of 5 levels) are the only students mandated to receive direct English instruction. All others get supposedly get their English instruction in the content area. In NYC, this means that a student who is low intermediate is in a classroom of up to 34 native speakers learning Global HIstory in order to pass the regents. We are back to sink or swim.
LikeLike
Do these content teachers have an extension certificate in ESL? If so, I doubt these minimally trained people will be able to do it well, especially if ELLs are mixed with regular ed. students in large classes.
LikeLike
Are/were charter school teachers and teach for america faux-teachers exempt from these tests? I refuse any longer to capitalize teach for america. It has seemed to me that the past 10 years have brought more hurdles for actual teachers to become teachers, while it has been free for all for the faux “teachers.”
Has Pearson succeeded in the video submissions to become a teacher (excepting/exempting, of course, the teach for america pearls)?
LikeLike
NY was not always insane when it came to education.
When I got certified in NY, the certification process actually seemed fairly rational. A single test was required, which actually did not seem all that bad. The main requirement was that you had gone through a year long teacher prep program that actually included useful courses in child psychology, psychology of teaching and learning and teaching methods capped by a semester long student teaching stint with a master teacher.
I have not lived in NY in decades but it really appears to have been taken over by fruitcakes, at least when it comes to education.
LikeLike
Of course this test, like anything these days imposed upon teachers or future teachers, is/was a hyper-politicized attempt to jam up the profession and further the running narrative about how sitting teachers are incompetents and unfit at their very roots.
The problem here though is again about narrative. I can tell you from hearing stuff here “on the ground” in NY from the general public that this whole pull back of this test is registering very poorly. People are seeing teachers not having to meet basic standards. They don’t see the whole story we do. They have bought, for the most part, the entire reform narrative.
Again, winning a little battle here but losing the larger war. Definitely not saying this is a bad thing about the tests. It’s fantastic! What I am saying though is that controlling the narrative or at least having a loud and solid counter-narrative is essential in winning. And we just aren’t there. This test issue just reaffirmed to a huge swath of voting New Yorkers that teachers don’t have to meet many basic standards. You and I know that that is wrong but it’s our fault they don’t have better knowledge and perspective on it all.
LikeLike
The same here in California. Much of the public (including within school district administrations) has been taught to view test scores as accurate measures of teacher quality, (charter schools as magical) and teachers as bullies and molesters on fat cat salaries. The media, especially NY and LA Times are greatly to blame. Better to do the right thing and ease the testing obsession than appease those duped by a massive propaganda campaign with Broad appeal.
LikeLike
I graduated Valedictorian from Russell Sage, and completed my master’s at SUNYA. I had a very successful 23 year career teaching, and won many national teaching awards. I got the first two questions wrong.
LikeLike
Shameful.
You should return all your awards and degrees
… and repent.
May Betsy have mercy on your soul.
LikeLike
Is there an identifiable, vested interest, working to keep the test?
Who gets the $118 per person?
LikeLike
The testing company gets the money. Taking four such tests is expensive. If you don’t pass, you buy test prep books, pay for test prep and try again.
LikeLike
New York has a very long history of requiring exams (since 1898), a Board of Examiners created exams until 1990 … my blog below goes through the history of requiring pre-service exams and the current ten plus hours of required exams w/ no test of reliability or validity.
LikeLike
I passed a district test based in part on my having read reviews of books in the New Yorker. This said more about the test constructor than of me.
I passed a state math test because of my knowledge of test construction. I could do few of the calculations.
A colleague taught his students with disabilities test-taking skills and pushed them from below-basic to above basic.
I was able to push students to score two years higher by teaching test construction and test-reasoning skills.
Two intellectual and more than competent English as a Second Language teachers I knew had difficulty taking timed tests about English and could not continue teaching. Don’t feel bad. They started businesses at which they doubled their income. If you can’t teach, go into business?
LikeLike
These tests are just money makers for Pearson and company!
LikeLike
They used to be run by the states. Then they decided to hand it over to Pearson to “save money”. No money is being saved, it is just pushing costs into teachers.
LikeLike
When Pearson takes control of any test, the cost to the consumer is vastly inflated.
The GED used to be inexpensive. The cost skyrocketed after Pearson took it over.
The number of people taking it plummeted because they couldn’t afford the cost.
The failure rate went up because Pearson made it much harder to pass.
LikeLike
Dear Diane,
Why are NYS Bd. of Regent’s members not paid? If they were, wouldn’t it attract more competent members?
I became homeless for 3 years due to a course requirement for foreign language teaching licensure which does not exist in my subject area.
LikeLike
It is a great honor to be selected as a Regent. Money is not the lure. The State Assembly chooses them because it has more votes than the State Senate. For many years, Sheldon Silver picked the Regents because he was the Speaker. But our US Attorney Prete Baharq got him removed and convicted for taking money. Now it is a more open process.
LikeLike
Yes, and according to an interview Mr. Bharara gave to the New Yorker Magazine, Speaker Sheldon Silver’s picks were a power play, based on favoritism.
Does this mean we finally have competant, critical thinking Regent’s members, now that Silver’s reign is over?
LikeLike