I have been thinking about writing a post about the uselessness of standardized tests as a measure of learning, which I may yet do, but then discovered Peter Greene had done his own take on this timeless question: What should we measure? How? Why?
If you want a description on my dislike for standardized testing, read my latest book SLAYING GOLIATH. The tests are administered in the spring. The results are reported in September, give or take a few weeks. The “results” have no diagnostic value. They mainly serve to label children, using instruments that give advantages to those who are already privileged. The outcomes are tightly correlated with family income and education. The same kids always end up in the bottom half, year after year, test after test. And the lesson that all children learn is that every question has a right answer.
Here is a standardized test question: When will the quarantine of social life end? When will life resume, more or less to normal? The answer: No one knows.
How can we expect to teach uncertainty and indeterminacy to students when we grill them for years on finding the one right answer.
Peter Greene writes:
Lots of folks are worried about–or at least pretending to be worried about–the notion that students may lose a step or two during the coronahiatus, and that’s reasonable concern. Every teacher knows that September, not April, is the cruelest month, the month in which you discover just how much information just sort of fell out of students’ heads under the warm summer sun. This pandemic pause is undoubtedly going to set some educational goals back.
But which goals? Exactly what kind of ground do we think we’re going to lose?
Of course, the testing companies will try to convince us that our kids are in a terrible crisis, which can be solved only by more testing.
Peter warns: Please do not confuse “student achievement” and “test scores.”
But most people in education do that as a matter of course.
Look, there’s no shame in the folks at NWEA taking a wild-ass guess because nobody has data for anything like this. And there’s no shame (well, maybe there’s some) in talking about test scores on narrowly focused standardized tests. But say what you mean. Use the right words. Don’t grab a bunch of figures about the price of oranges and start making declarations about how to grow apples. Words mean things, even in 2020. Particularly as a journalist, you should use the exact, correct, accurate word. And “student achievement” is not the exact accurate phrase to use in place of “test score.”
This matters right now, first of all, because it mis-represents what people have on their minds. “Will my child fall far behind on the content? When will she learn the rest of her physics stuff? How will the school band survive all this? Will she get the knowledge and skills she’ll need in college? How will she stay in touch with her friends? How will she get better at writing when she’s doing so little? Is she going to get enough education to succeed in the future?” The list of parent and students goes on and on and on and I’ll bet you dollars to coronadonuts that very few parents have, “Oh my God! What if her standardized test scores drop!” near the very top of their list.
But it especially matters because when schools head back, folks in charge are going to need to make some decisions about what is really important, what really needs attention. If we keep letting people pretend that “test score” is the same as “student achievement,” the new school year will be immediately mired in test prep test prep test prep. The wise thing to do? Scrap the test for at least another year and focus on actually educating students.
Resources like time and focus and money and emotional fortitude are going to be limited, and policy makers, actual educators, and people with education flavored products to sell are going to be locked in debate over where those resources should be focused. “Getting test scores back up” should not be the answer. Let me remind you that even many of the reformsters have finally concluded that the Big Standardized Test isn’t really telling us anything useful about students’ futures, and students’ futures should be the number one priority going back, and that means focusing on actual education and not test scores.
Yes, that will be hard to measure. For folks worried about that, I have just one question:
Which is more important– getting students what they need, or getting them what can be most easily measured?
Read what Peter wrote and tell me what you think? Is there any way to avoid getting mired in even more high-stakes standardized tests to measure what kids supposedly do and do not know?
Kids are not canned goods on a factory line.
Leave them alone. Don’t measure them.
How about doing something DIFFERENT for a change and stop the madness.
When was the last time you took a multiple choice test?
I took the SAT in high school in 1955. I took the Miller Analogies Test when I entered Teachers College in 1972. Since then, I have never taken a standardized test.
Channeling Sr. Swacker, we shouldn’t measure anything because we can’t. We can evaluate and assess, but only very indirectly.
Personally, I’d like to see the focus, at least initially, being on well-being more than academics. Re-establishing (or establishing for the first time) relationships is going to be the key to getting past the trauma of the confinement, isolation and fear that students have been facing (and may still be facing). Learning how to re-navigate relationships in light of social distancing, re-learning how to interact face-to-face, processing everything they’ve experienced, etc. is going to be crucial.
Sure, some kids might crave the normalcy of just returning to a typical academic schedule, but that might be beyond the reach of many other kids for a while.
Kudos to Peter Green!!!!
Yes, there is an automatic assumption that our high-stakes tests actually measure what they purport to measure, that one can look at the scores from these tests and tell what kids have learned, that test scores = achievement.
Journalists almost question this, and every time I read a news piece that bewails the latest test scores, I fume, for I know, I know, that the ELA tests do not, in fact, “measure” what they purport to measure.
The tests are not valid. Given how vague and broad the so-called “standards” that they purport to measure are, no test of them COULD be valid. And since the ELA “standards” are almost entirely content free, they miss most of what constitutes accomplishment in this field of reading and writing.
I’ve had issues with my dear friend, Señor Swacker, over his critique of “measurement.” Yes, this term is used for physical quantities. Yes, a “standard” is a precise-as-needed benchmark against which something is “measured” (e.g., a meter is 1579800.762042(33) wavelengths of helium-neon laser light in a vacuum). So, a clearly defined characteristic (in this case, extension in Newtonian space) of two objects, a steel rod, say, and these 579800.762042(33) wavelenths of helium-neon laser light, are compared. Independent observers, in repeated trials, will come up with close to the same “measurement.” And, yes, what is being done with tests in school fails to approximate that. There is no precise “standard.” There is no clearly defined characteristic of the observed object (the student) that is precisely described by the “standard.”
So, I concede that we should probably avoid the word “measurement.” It lends of patina of accuracy to what educators do when they test that simply isn’t there. If a “standard” is so vague as to say that the student can “make inferences from text” or “use commas correctly,” clearly one CANNOT write one or two multiple-choice questions that validly “measure” the correspondence of the observed object (the student) with this “standard,” and so clearly, on the basis of the test, one cannot validly claim that the student does or does not conform to the “standard.” So, our high-stakes standardized tests in ELA are a scam. They are numerology, not science.
The validity of the test depends on what is being “measured” and how. The high-stakes ELA tests measure very little actual knowledge in the field of English because the purported “standards” are almost content free. They are broad, vague lists of skills, for the most part. And they don’t measure those skills because the “standards” are not concrete enough to be operationalizable in a test. What’s being done with these tests, with regard to the skills, is equivalent to attempting to measure the size of a virus with a yardstick. The instrument is too crude. And it is equivalent to attempting to measure the average height of people by measuring the height of Bob. The sampling done by the one or two test questions is not broad enough to be representative.
All this ought to be obvious. But journalists (and the think wankers) don’t every seem to think, at all, about any of this. They just assume that Pear$on is being honest when it claims to have a valid test. Might as well assume that Jabba the Trump is being honest when he tells you about the fortune you are going to make if you sign up for Trump University.
The testing is a scam. And Green hits the key point: scores on these tests are not equivalent to achievement. They can’t be because the tests are not valid measures of achievement.
A multi-billion-dollar-a-year scam. And one that has led to a devolution of our curricula and pedagogy into test prep based on the puerile Gates/Coleman bullet list.
Enough. The testing is an enormous waste of resources, which are going to be very scarce after this pandemic. And it’s pointless pedagogically. And it has enormous opportunity costs in terms of lost learning. And it is abusive.
Anyone who supports this testing is clueless and is a collaborator in child abuse. End the federal standardized testing mandate now. Send the testing con men packing. Better yet, set up a truth and reconciliation commission to look into the scam, and make the test makers pay reparations for the damage they have done.
cx: journalists almost NEVER question this
It’s in times like these that we recognize how useless the big test is. It has nothing to do with student as it is designed for politicians and their game playing. However, students will be returning some day and educators must be prepared. Here are some thoughts from my blog. https://savingstudents-caplee.blogspot.com/2020/03/when-kids-get-back-to-school.html
You have the right answers, to a great degree. What you do not have is……the people who write about education are lazy, and not always well informed. They tend to pay attention to the people who have a financial stake, and a high level of talent in manipulating them. For openers, Biden’s vp choice is likely to be important, and there will be huge pressure upon him to choose someone who is comfortable with Arne Duncan and Bill Gates. It will not be limited to the presidential race. There will be more subtle pressure from those who think the election is far too important to be arguing about education. Parents and teachers are not the ones to fear regarding that. Fighting for them will will bring rewards.
“They tend to pay attention to the people who have a financial stake, and a high level of talent in manipulating them.” This exactly describes big money “education” journalism.
I’m gonna measure my teenage son when schools reopen! He is eating me out of house and home. He started this pandemic at 6′ tall and under 148 pounds, but he has added another inch and I’m sure more than a few pounds will be added by the time this is over.
That’s perfect because—and I can’t believe it, but RESEARCH SHOWS—height measurements are equally accurate as standardized test scores in predicting future success! Actually, measuring height is probably more valid than high stakes testing because of Campbell’s Law. I like the idea of measuring height when schools open, but then, I’m pretty tall. How about if we measure students with hot dog eating contests. Again, just as meaningful as the state tests, and almost as unhealthy.
🙂
Love this, LisaM 😀
You asked:
Is there any way to avoid getting mired in even more high-stakes standardized tests to measure what kids supposedly do and do not know?
Not until ESSA is folded, mutilated, shredded and put into the dump.
The Devos-approved state plans with A-F grades and report cards for schools must also be shredded and dumped.
Think of all the wonderful resources schools might have if they could keep the money they are now compelled to throw into the coffers of testing companies.
Think of the expanded time available to reintroduce joy in learning as one indicator for school quality.
I just took a multiple choice quiz with my son about a book in his anthology. I had read the writing piece and even I stunk at the multiple choice test. As a former teacher who got to teach before NCLB, we got to do authentic reading tasks and responded to literature in numerous ways.
We are doing our children such a disservice. It makes me sick to think that our children will lack the ability to be critical and independent readers.
I sent his teacher three documents.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1F1OtGbYD8GJFvWVSY2mpcaijMswVMKHm/edit?fbclid=IwAR1MPmfcHnk45rUqdBpGA5FBhvN4Zy5k11I5rmuBOnrL1G96Or4dyfj1MBg#heading=h.gjdgxs
https://drive.google.com/file/d/18j-klZ1icehgNV61Lg5PdgjTXa3WzK6f/view?fbclid=IwAR1xclaWgn3vs20pEcCPJ7DZBw-9u3H3K0ai2OyqeSKRe62nvqGkm_LVNlM
https://radicalscholarship.wordpress.com/2020/03/25/misreading-the-main-idea-about-reading/?fbclid=IwAR1cj4o9UW8QelAsCmh_oF9rUOYS5FpgeagoYDvUSJ6I0WI7fUHeKxCxjAA
That’s 2 articles not 3 – I mention it only because they’re terrific & I want to read the third if there is one 😉
Not a reading teacher – for-lang ed here – but I’m zeroed in at the moment on how we gain comprehension from text we find difficult. A book-club friend & I are studying the current [Balzac] selection in French, via zoom. Just like kids in a classroom, our ability levels are different – and we’re also different people. [I would add one method to the excellent suggestions here: after students have already given it a go, teacher expressively reads aloud a para the reader(s) couldn’t completely grasp, while they follow along in text.] The two of us gain tremendously from just discussing reactions, targeting/ looking up on the spot any key word-meanings we’d missed, noting Q’s raised by the text [& chasing down answers before next meeting] — all part of the process so well-described at your links.
We are used to assuming that the students forgot most of what they learned. More accurately, we are used to assuming that we will need to re-teach an idea so that the student learns it again in a different context. For example, I never recall a geometry student who did not benefit from the reteaching of simplification of radical expressions.
So the only thing that is really new is that the students will have been out of school for a longer time, and will be overcome with the anxiety that all this will return in the fall, potentially with more harshly imposed sanctions. They will be thinking about this. Some will hope for a return of the Covid, for the chaos excites them. Others will fear such a return. This will be one of the main things they are thinking about.
In neither of these ideas is a testing of students. Hey! Teachers! Help them kids not feel alone!
“More accurately, we are used to assuming that we will need to re-teach an idea so that the student learns it again in a different context.” This is very well said, & applies to any subject, I think.
When my kids were little & took CCD, we moms used to joke that they learned the same stuff every year because they forgot it every summer. But of course it wasn’t true: every year they brought with them more life experience, more learning, more opinions and questions. The curriculum in a sense evolved as they did.
If school opens in September, that opening will be a few weeks before the election … unless Trump has managed to start the Civil War that he must want since he has threatened the country a few times that if he lost or was impeached there will be a Civil War.
“Trump Threatens ‘Civil War’ If He’s Impeached”
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/09/donald-trump-civil-war-impeachment
Sometime between now and November, we will probably hear Trump threaten the country with a Civil War if he isn’t re-elected, too.
Measure your waistline to see how much weight you gained eating too much & not exercising.
Creds. to Chelsea Handler, who was a riot on The Late Show w/Jimmy Fallon at Home.
Watch at least the first 10 minutes if his daughters are on: they are adorable & delightful!
Another bonus id that he really doesn’t include WH it in his monologue or elsewhere. I am sick of hearing about WH it at this point; nothing is funny.
My 6 year old grandson “lets” me teach him when he isn’t watching tv shows featuring other people playing Minecraft. Luckily for my daughter, I used to be a home instruction teacher who worked with kids after school to help them keep up on their assignments when they were out sick or on a long term suspension. I also have a degree in El Ed, although I spent my career as a school librarian. I work one on one with him on activities similar to those on line. I can personalize instruction where the computer activities only go so far.
Will he fall behind? Maybe, but it shouldn’t take much for him to catch up. He’s a bright boy but his attention span for school work is limited. Today I put coins and a few bills in those plastic eggs which he had to find throughout the house. Then he had to add up the coins to see how much money he collected. He got to keep the $2.00 bill. (My daughter asked if it was still considered real money). We are also using magazines to cut out pictures or words to create an ABC book. This plus some worksheets or other activities, some sent home by the teacher. Always a story at the end. Sometimes a sing a long or an art activity.
But how many parents who are working, even if from home, have the time to devote to teaching. That’s why most kids go to school in the first place. Then there are those who don’t have a clue, not even access to a computer program that will do some drills. Or they have a child that needs a lot of attention and reinforcement in the learning process. Those with learning disabilities are the ones we should worry about.
It’s going to be a process to take the kids from where they are at to where they need to go come the next school year because the discrepancies will be wide ranging. Testing, unless it is diagnostic, will not be the answer. Hopefully, individualized instruction will make a come back.
Maybe the teachers should be teaching the parents how to teach their children at home during the pandemic. Teachers write lessons for parents to use to teach their children.
Probably wouldn’t work.
Starting Monday there is a half hour lesson from the teacher online. Then there are two online apps to use – one for math and one for ELA. Plus free reading time and some links recommended by the special area teachers for enrichment. Viola! School! If you can get your child to participate.
Too much computer time (Lap tops with the appropriate apps provided by the school district).
I say the kids need a break. I am a living example of how a test score doesn’t measure everything about a student. If I had been judged in elementary by my tests scores, you’d think I wasn’t going to amount to anything later in life. I was a bad test taker and had family issues that messed with my self esteem. Now that I’m a special Ed teacher, I hate how our sped students are expected to perform at the level of a student that is on level when they are clearly not. For them, growth should be measured and should matter.