Archives for category: Testing

Here is an article written by a Texas businessman and former legislator complaining that young people in Texas are woefully underprepared for college or the workplace.

The answer: more testing and accountability.

He fails to note that Texas has been pushing that testing and accountability thing for at least 20 years. Remember Ross Perot? Remember the Texas miracle? The whole country is stuck with NCLB because of all the “Texas Brags” that turned out to be all hat and no cattle.

Some people say that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting to get different results.

I’d say that the definition of ideology is doing the same thing over and over again without regard to evidence or experience.

When your method fails, and fails, and fails, and fails, don’t blame the kids. Blame the method.

This Ed school Professor, Tom Slekar, is not silent. He blogs, makes satirical videos, has a radio program (The Chalkface). He even ran for school board in his town in Pennsylvania. And he is leading the fight against high-stakes testing.

Slekar has called on his colleagues to join him on the barricades.

Read this post for more information about Tim.

Slekar writes:

Parents get ready for new tests this school year.

Pennsylvania is rolling out the new Keystone exams (the Keystones will take the place of the PSSAs).

All of Pennsylvania’s 11th graders will be required to take Keystones (high-stakes standardized tests) in algebra, literature and biology.

Great. New tests to replace the old tests.

And why has Pennsylvania decided to get new high-stakes tests?
According to the spokesman for the Pennsylvania Department of Education Tim Eller, “We have heard from the higher education community and business community that students are not graduating with the skills needed to enter the workforce. These exams are raised to the level of what’s needed to ensure that students are meeting certain requirements before they leave school.”

First, what qualifications does a spokesman for the DOE have that permits him to make such a broad statement about testing?

Second, the above quote is total garbage. Being in the higher education community, I can tell you for a fact that most college professors do not want more high-stakes testing. In fact, we want it to stop.

Students aren’t coming to college unprepared because they didn’t have the right test. They come to college unprepared because of tests. They don’t have workforce skills because of tests.

High-stakes tests and the perverted notion that we can test students into proficiency are the real problem.

We also know (but for some reason “qualified” people at the Pennsylvania DOE don’t know) that the last 10 years has been a disaster for students.
Testing has essentially denied a generation of children a quality and equitable education rich in all academic areas. Testing and test preparation are the problems.

The new Keystone exams will do nothing to better prepare students for college and the workforce.

You don’t need test-taking skills to thrive in college and the workplace. You need to be able to think and you need to be able to learn – two things standardized tests don’t and will never measure.

Parents, please save your children from this new disaster by opting out.

A reader notes that all schools–whether charter or public–are driven in the wrong direction by the current obsession with test scores. High stakes testing distorts education and contorts it for data purposes. He/she comments:

I teach at a KIPP high school and have been thoroughly disillusioned and am looking to get out as soon as possible. We are absolutely driven by test scores (though I wouldn\’t say that\’s unique to KIPP; I think most schools are feeling the state breathing down their necks these days) and my lesson plans have to account for every minute, and students must produce an \”exit ticket\” every day evaluating what they\’ve learned. Obviously, in high school English, this doesn\’t allow for the fact that you often realize what you\’ve learned a bit further down the road, and it leaves no room for the sort of open-ended, robust debate and discussion of literature that characterized my (middle-class, public school) education. We\’re so busy breaking things down into component parts so we can say that a student can show he\’s mastered indirect characterization or metaphor on a five-minute quiz at the end of class that we never get to the beauty of Tolstoy\’s language or the aching desperation of Hemingway’s ”Hills Like White Elephants.”

My greatest regret is that I moved mountains to get my godson into a KIPP school and turned down an opportunity for him to go to boarding school because I thought it was too elitist. It may have been, but it would have given him a comprehensive education as well.

Who is hurting the kids? Reverend Jesse Jackson knows.

A lot of pious preaching came from reformers who opposed the Chicago teachers’ strike. They said, “You are hurting the children by keeping them out of school.”

We never hear them say that the Mayor and the school board are hurting the children by denying them small classes, decent facilities, a good curriculum, social workers, the arts, and well-maintained facilities.

The money’s all gone, the reformers say, but there’s always enough to give subsidies to developers and big corporations. The only time the till is empty is when the topic is public schools.

This reader is grateful to the 88 education scholars who protested the misuse of test scores in Chopicago. They told Mayor Rahm Emanuel he was wrong. That takes guts. And it matters. It’s important for teachers to know they are not alone. And they are not wrong.

The reader writes:

Let’s not forget the CReATE group of 88 professors who sent a letter “to Mayor Rahm Emanuel, CPS CEO Jean-Claude Brizard and the Board of Education signed by 88 faculty members from 15 local universities warning that using student test scores in teacher evaluation could do more harm than good. The universities included the University of Illinois Chicago, DePaul University and the University of Chicago.” (http://www.catalyst-chicago.org/notebook/2012/03/26/19951/professors-caution-cps-using-tests-evaluate-teachers )

I think it is no coincidence that Chicago is now the epicenter of the fight against corporate education reform.  With teachers, Ed professors, community groups, and parents all united…it is a powerful force loud enough to actually change the conversation!

I hope other ed professors around the county unite and speak out like our activist profs here in Chi-town did!  It makes a difference.

An earlier post predicted that the faux reforms of the day will collapse like a house of cards when the public realizes the damage done to children and the quality of education. This reader says that the tests that are the foundation for all of the current education reforms–like merit pay and evaluation by scores–are fundamentally and irreparably flawed.

Queue the Kafka indeed! I’ve worked in the educational publishing industry for years, and I have had occasion to read hundreds of state tests. Almost every test that I have read has been RIDDLED with errors–was so full of errors that it looked like some sort of rough draft. Often, the errors on the state tests are such that the officially correct answer is actually incorrect. Here’s an example:

“There are 8 apples on a table. If you take away 2 apples, how many apples do you have?”

The answer is supposed to be “six,” but, of course, the answer to the question that was actually asked is “two.”

I have a standing bet that I can take any one of these state standardized tests and find at least ten errors in it. It’s a bet I’ve never lost. These tests are really sloppily prepared, and as the experience of the teacher in this video indicates, there is little accountability for their quality.

However, the problem runs much deeper than the editorial vetting of the exams. The biggest problem with them is that the supposed research adduced by the testing companies to support the validity and reliability of their tests is a lot of smoke and mirrors. A test of reading ability is like a test on “ability to make one’s way in the world.” What’s being tested is extraordinarily vague, broad, and complex. Suppose that one tested driving ability by giving people an exam that looked at their ability to identify car parts–to distinguish, say, a hub cap from a windshield wiper. Such a test would be very like the state exams that we give to test reading ability.

Sorry, once again, I forgot to add the link to the article. It’s here now. Please read it.

Tom Pauken is not only the Texas Workforce Commissioner, he is a prominent member of the Texas Republican party.

Read what he says about NCLB.

He says that labeling schools by test scores based on formulas written in Washington, D.C., and Austin is a sort of “abstract intellectualism” that doesn’t work.

He says there are lots of good jobs that go begging because young people aren’t prepared for them.

Here is his testimony to the state legislature.

His only error is in assuming that the demand for high-stakes testing prepares students for college.

It doesn’t. To prepare well for college, you need far more than the ability to answer bubble-test questions. You need to be well read, able to write well, able to think for yourself, able to figure out complex problems, know a goodly amount of history.

None of these things matter for NCLB–or for that matter, for the Race to the Top.

Both NCLB and RTTT are “abstract intellectualism” at their worst.

In a recent interview, I predicted that what is now called (self-proclaimed) as “reform” would come tumbling down like a house of cards as the public realized the damage to children and to the quality of education.

This reader in Illinois picks up that theme, saying that the foundation of VAM (value-added assessment) rests on the standardized tests, and they are a weak foundation indeed. When the house of cards comes tumbling down, it will be apparent that they rested on a method of assessment that is flawed at its core. She responds here to the comment of another reader:

You nailed it in your next-to-last paragraph–“if my students understood pineapples and hare races a little better…”–it isn’t simply the VAMs that are junk, it’s the very TESTS that all this is based upon
that are junk! As a special ed. teacher who administered these tests for years (and IL uses Pearson), I was able to look at the tests (because we read the math and science from scripts), and I can tell you that there have been NUMEROUS faulty questions and answers (more than one correct answer, NO correct answer) over numerous years. This holds true for all the prep garbage we buy, as well. Last but not least, people who score the written portions of tests (extended response on Reading Comprehension selections) are often people not competent to do so–such as ESL adults, who did not understand the nuances of the English language.
(As I have before, I must reference Todd Farley’s must-read 2009 book,”Making the Grades: My Misadventures in the Standardized Testing Industry,” which will explain in detail).
Farley also wrote a Huffington Post article this year about COMPUTERS scoring written essays (another must-read).

When you factor this together–along with all the score-juking that goes on (again, read the book!), WHAT “valid,
reliable” basis is there upon which to base a VAM?

It is all a house of cards–just like the wall that Diane predicts will
collapse. This bodes well for us–public schools and teachers–as this is the basis of our fight. Lawyers, ready yourselves!

Marcus Winters recommends using value-added assessment to get rid of “ineffective” teachers. His paper was published by the conservative Manhattan Institute, which regularly issues his and others’ critiques of unions, tenure, seniority and any kind of job protection for teachers.

Many studies–and practical experience–have demonstrated that value-added assessment is unstable, unreliable and inaccurate. A teacher with a high rating may have a low rating the next year. The National Academy of Education and the American Educational Research Association published a joint paper warning that VAA says more about which students are assigned to the class than about teacher quality.

And then there is the problem that there is no district that has been able to demonstrate that VAA actually identifies ineffective or effective teachers. When New York City published its value-added ratings, the allegedly “worst” teacher in the city taught immigrant students who cycled in and out of her class as they learned English. As Linda Darling-Hammond and others have warned, value-added assessment will encourage teachers to shun the students with the highest needs and gifted students. Neither will produce the expected gains.

It is interesting  and curious that Arne Duncan’s favorite innovation happens to be the favorite solution of the right to find and fire “ineffective” teachers.

I will never understand why the rightwingers are so devoted to high-stakes testing, which is known to produce narrowing of the curriculum, teaching to the test, gaming the system, and cheating. What’s to like? Maybe they like it because it gives them a club with which to bash teachers, their unions, and public education.

Jan Carr, an author of children’s books, is a dedicated public school parent. She wrote a post wondering why the powerful elites in our society are so obsessed with testing and data. She wondered why they care so little for developing critical thinking.

Jan wrote: “I’ve been a scrappy public school mom for 12 years and counting, and I’ve watched the increasing encroachment of the data and accountability business, which would have our kids prepping for and taking deadening tests at every turn, and our teachers endlessly graded and derided for test results that are a meaningless distraction from real learning. A rich and full education digs deeper; it’s inextricably entwined with books, literature, writing, and the life of the mind; it develops critical thinking.”

I read her latest post and asked Mike Petrilli of the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute to respond to it. I have known Mike for many years, and I hold out hope that someday he too will evolve and renounce the reforms he now champions. I think this will happen when his own children encounter them, as Jan Carr’s did.

I invite readers to comment on this discussion.

This is Mike’s commentary:

Dear Ms. Carr,

I enjoyed reading your post about critical thinking; it sounds like you and your son have been lucky to have had some very talented teachers.

l’ve never met Bill Gates, or Eli Broad, or Michael Bloomberg, or Rupert Murdoch; I can’t speak for what lies in their hearts. But I find it very unlikely that they don’t want children to “think critically” because they want to produce a generation of drones. I know that sort of rhetoric is common on the left (including from the late Howard Zinn) but to believe it you have to also believe that Barack Obama, the late Ted Kennedy, the liberal icon George Miller, and countless other liberal supporters of education reform are also out to unplug our children’s minds. That doesn’t pass the “critical thinking” test.

What motivates these folks, as I understand it, is an earnest belief that in today’s knowledge economy, the only way poor kids are going to have a shot at escaping inter-generational poverty is to gain the knowledge, skills, and character strengths that will prepare them to enter and complete some sort of post-secondary education–the pathway to the middle class. And that while reading and math scores don’t come close to measuring everything that counts, they do measure skills that have been linked to later success in college, the workplace, and life.

I suspect that all of these men would like to see students engaged in more of the kind of critical thinking that you describe, and that’s one reason many support the move to the more rigorous “Common Core” standards for English Language Arts and math. The ELA standards, in particular, are designed to push students toward this sort of complex thinking.

The testing movement has caused a lot of harm, I agree, in terms of narrowing the curriculum and encouraging bad teaching. Moving to better standards and tests is one way to address that. But by throwing out the baby with the bathwater we risk going back to the days when poor and minority kids were held to very low expectations–and their achievement plateaued as a result.

In the last two decades, poor and minority kids have made two grade levels of progress in reading and math, according to the National Assessment of Educational Progress. The hope–and it’s really only a hypothesis at this point–is that those greater math and reading skills will help a generation of kids do much better in college and the real world than they otherwise would have. The question for educators and reformers is: How do we keep the good that’s come from testing and accountability while eliminating the bad?

Mike Petrilli