Dennis Shirley is the Duganne faculty fellow and professor at Boston College’s Lynch School of Education and Human Development. His new book with Andy Hargreaves is entitled Five Paths of Student Engagement: Blazing the Trail to Learning and Success.
Shirley contends in this article in Commonwealth Magazine that standardized testing no longer fits the needs of students, if it ever did.
He writes:
AS WE EMERGED from the pandemic’s constraints, we finally had the freedom to book dinner reservations and plan a summer vacation, but in the midst of that liberation, our students were obligated to the policy of standardized academic testing.
Despite opposition by every Massachusetts professional educational association, the political appointees in the State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education and the commissioner and secretary of education responded to COVID-19 by administering the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) to third to eighth grade students to conclude the school year, even though Superintendent Jeff Riley previously said, “We’ve spent a lot of time on systems and structures, on accountability and test scores. We need to get back to instruction, and deep teaching and learning.”
What’s going on? For years, standardized testing advocates have been on the defensive because the tests failed to improve student achievement as promised by reformers. Second, the rise of the testing industry was correlated with growing rates of anxiety and depression among young people. Third, tests aggravated rather than ameliorated differences in achievement among racial and ethnic groups, and between social classes.
Enter climate change strikes that peaked in 2019, the pandemic, and the surge of racial struggles during the past year. The triple whammy of environmental, health, and societal challenges was surprising and emboldened critics who want a different kind of education that speaks to their concerns and aspirations rather than the clamoring for accountability of distant government bureaucrats.nullThe critics are no fringe group. For years, public opinion surveys have revealed that a majority of Americans agreed that there was too much testing in schools. Defenders fought back by arguing that the tests are objective, that they inflict little or no damage on students, and that they emphasize that what is taught in schools must be taken seriously. If there are problems with testing, they say, the tests can be revised–but not suspended.
Is there an escape from the impasse?
Shirley believes there is.
We have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to get our schools focused on teaching and learning rather than testing and accountability. We must not squander it. It’s going to be arduous, but the trendlines are clear: COVID-19 is winding down in the US, so let’s make dinner reservations and summer vacation plans, and when it comes to schools, let’s make sure our students are free to learn—and that our teachers are free to teach, too.
Thank you for sharing this. It sums up everything. I love reading anything Dennis Shirley or Andy Hargreaves have to say.
I already have one book by Dennis Shirley – “The Mindful Teacher” – and I couldn’t put it down once I started reading. I just ordered “Five Paths of Student Engagement” on Amazon.
Having students answer questions is not obsolete. What is wrong is the way we use the answers to the questions. What Is wrong is the use of their answers to harass teachers, pigeonhole students, and criticize schools.
What is right is for teachers to use the answers for self examination and improvement. What is right is for teachers to be able to examine tests to see what other teachers are expecting of their students.
100%
Complaining about testing is a really bad look for teachers.
Unfortunately, the proper argument made here is too nuanced for a sound bite that works.
I tune it out immediately at this point.
“Complaining about testing is a really bad look for teachers.”
Don’t give a damn about “a really bad look”. What is the difference between legitimate critiquing that challenges the authorities in their educational malpractice follies, i.e., standards and testing malpractice regime, and “complaining”?
The authorities-especially the adminimals, will proclaim that critiquing is actually complaining and the teachers should just shut the eff up and “do their job”.
Much more than this is wrong, though you would be spot on if you said that the use of the test results is the BIGGEST problem with them, which is, perhaps, what you intended. But then there are the problems with the tests themselves–the ridiculously tricky, convoluted questions; the fact that the questions and the tests do not capture and, in fact, vastly distort the English language arts; the way those questions are endlessly imitated in curricula; the fact that the questions do not validly measure what they purport to measure and cannot because of the vagueness and breadth of the “standards” ; the fact that the math standards are totally developmentally inappropriate at the early ages; the fact that all kids are not on the same schedules, and the tests are Procrustian beds or, to use a different metaphor, factory-like in their unrelenting rigidity; and much, much more that I won’t go into.
Indeed. All of that
I wish I had a nickle for every time I had an editor in educational publishing tell me, after the CC$$ appeared, “No, you can’t do that. It’s not in the [#^#@&&@#&!!!] standards.”
Stopped innovation cold.
Yikes! Nickel.
He melted down some nickel
And with it made a pickle.
Praise the pickle got.
Then it was forgot.
Taste in art is fickle.
Nickles and Dyems
I wish I had a nickle and dyem
For every single goldarn tyem
That self correct mispells a word
Cuz I’d be ritch, and that’s ashurd
Self-correct! LOL. Perfect. But in this case, it was aliens interrupting my cognitive processes because I wasn’t wearing my tin foil hat.
Standardized tests have always discriminated against poor students. We have known for many years. Standardized tests allows schools to rank, sort and sometimes pigeonhole vulnerable students. High stakes testing harms students, schools and sometimes teachers.
Narrowed curricula from high stakes testing undermine real learning and meaningful engagement. Teachers have always known the value providing students with a comprehensive education built on positive relationships It is sad that teachers must try to reclaim their right to teach without wasting time on mandates and regulations.
Yes, a basic modern-day formula: Standardized tests allow schools to rank , sort and pigeonhole vulnerable students for lucrative and ever changing reforms.
Grades do exactly the same things, don’t they?
Grades are a better predictor of how well as student may perform in college than standardized tests. They are the results of students’ efforts, organization and study skills.
Retired,
Actually standardized test scores do a better job of predicting college performance than high school grades in the University of California system. See https://senate.universityofcalifornia.edu/_files/underreview/sttf-report.pdf#page102 .
There is, of course, a racial and gender hierarchy in high school grades. Asian students get the highest average grades, white students next, Latinx next, and African Americans the lowest grades. Girls have higher grades then boys, though the difference is small for Asian students. Grades allow schools to rank, sort and pigeon hole students. Don’t you agree?
Student GPA’s are like a long video rather than a snapshot.
If a student completes say 6 assessments in a quarter times 5 teachers, that yields 30 data points. Over a school year, that’s 120 data points. It’s a far better look at student performance than one and done. Teachers are also able to respond and intervene to correct weaknesses, which lead to improvements in student learning.
Standardized tests have none of those benefits.
@Christine, Retired Teacher, Retired: Said respectfully, standardized tests plus GPA in combination–research shows that these two factors do the best job in predicting college success. So each has a useful role. (Grades alone are not the best predictor of college performance.)
Standardized testing was and is an insidious poison of our K-12 schools.
Shirley, Standardized testing is obsolete. Shirley.
Obstolete Tests
Standards tests are obsolete
Thus is Shirley true
Standard tests are obstinate
This is Shirley too
The beatings will continue until morale improves.
Exactly!!!! xoxoxoxoxoxoxxo!!!!
Thank you, Mr. Shirley!
No, the ham radio is obsolete. It once served a useful purpose, but technology has advanced to provide better methods of doing the same thing.
Standardized testing has never served a useful purpose and there is no technology that could advance it to provide better methods of doing the same thing any more than technology can provide better methods of torture, war and death. If something is wrong, doing it better makes it wronger.
“Accountability” and policy makers’ denial of “climate change”
It’s past time Charles Koch stood trial and was forced to pay for the costs of man-made climate change. But for him, the consequences could have been ameliorated with the right actions.
Billionaires are practiced at insulating themselves from culpability. For protection from retribution, the richest 0.1% right wingers add layers like the Fordham Institute and like the Ohio GOP whose decisions enabled the $1 mil. charter school fleecing of Ohio citizens.