Archives for category: Testing

Kenneth Bernstein regularly blogs at The Daily Kos. He is an experienced teacher with National Board Certification.

He shares his views here on test prep and testing:

For a number of years, until I decided I had ethical problems with doing so, I earned money beyond my teaching salary by teaching and later tutoring SAT prep for Princeton Review.   That company probably has more experience with preparing students for standardized tests than any company in the nation.  Thus it is probably worthwhile to note what they taught us to say about the SAT to our students:

Other than a bit of vocabulary and some ability to read questions accurately, what the SAT measures is how well you did on that version of the SAT on that day.

In other words, it did not measure how bright you were, nor how prepared for college you were (high school grades are a better a predictor of 1st year grades at .30), and SAT had little predictive relevance beyond 1st year grade and for that it had a predictive validity (R-squared) of around 22%, meaning that it predicted less than 1/4 the actual first year grades.

We hav always known there was a strong correlation between family income and SAT scores.  Princeton review courses, which were more accessible to those with more income, merely exacerbated that problem.

Now test prep companies are already moving into the business of offering courses for high stakes state tests, and once we have tests aligned to the Common Core State Standards the problem will become even worse – those with money, who will already perform better, will gain an additional advantage by being able to purchase such test preparation.

What will this tell us?  Exactly what the SATs tell us according to Princeton Review – beyond the correlation with family income, how well the testee did on that application of that test on that day.



Wherever we find signs of bravery and intelligence in education, we must celebrate it.

The school committee of Taunton, Massachusetts, took the following wise action. It

“voted unanimously to send a letter to the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education opposing the amount of testing that school districts will be required to implement with the adoption of the Common Core Standards. The School Committee also requests that someone from DESE come and explain how the district is to implement this mandate. Where would the funds come from? The training? And most importantly, discuss how this will impact time on learning.

Currently, the 50 states combined spend approximately $1.3 billion on standardized testing. This money is spent on the development, publication, administration, and scoring of standardized tests that are required by the federal government. Is that really where we want to be putting $1.3 billion of the education money targeted for our public schools?

The money could be better spent on lowering class sizes, instructional technology, and innovative ideas that our students could benefit from.”

It will take wisdom, knowledge, experience, and courage to save education in this country.

Hats off to the Taunton School Committee.

Let us find many more like them and celebrate them.

Read more: http://www.tauntongazette.com/dcover/x5489255/LETTER-The-fighting-spirit-of-the-school-committee#ixzz25EgOC0IE

This teacher says that, for him, teaching is a “labor of love.”

Can it be measured by standardized tests?

Can his value be reduced to a number, fed into a data storage warehouse and crunched?

The tests measure one aspect of what students have learned.

Only one.

The tests do not measure everything that was taught, or everything that matters.

They are limited instruments, not designed to measure the worth of students or teachers.

A parent in Wisconsin wrote to say that the new “reform” law in his state requires that kindergarten children be assessed 2-3 times a year. He wants to opt out his child. He contacted the Wisconsin Reading Coalition to ask for their advice, and this was the response he received. He wants to know what others, perhaps some who are experts in early childhood education, think about this issue:

Wisconsin Reading Coalition

The kindergarten screening is like a well-baby check: looking for pre-reading predictors of eventual reading failure like poor phonemic awareness. It gives schools an opportunity to intervene early and prevent the academic, personal, and social fallout from poor reading. Poor reading, of course, affects the individual child, but also holds back the entire class. The assessment that was chosen by DPI (we would have preferred Predictive Assessment of Reading, as it also checks for rapid naming and vocabulary) is PALS (Phonological Awareness Literacy Screening), developed in Virginia. PALS is very short and low-key, delivered by the classroom teacher, and similar to many kindergarten classroom activities. You can see a video of the assessment being given at https://pals.virginia.edu/tools-k.html

In response to a post defining a failing school, Paul Thomas tweeted a definition of current school reform, as exemplified by the ruinous policies of No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top. It is called “ouroboros.”  See here for further explanation.

I am starting an honor roll for hero superintendents.

As of now, there are four.

If you know of others, nominate them with your reasons.

They deserve our thanks and praise.

Paul Perzanoski of Brunswick, Maine, stood up to a bullying governor.

John Kuhn of Perrin-Whitt Independent School District is a national model of bravery in opposition to political meddling.

Vickie Markavitch of Oakland, Michigan, spoke out against the state’s mislabeling of districts.

Here is another: Joshua Starr of Montgomery County (Md) public schools.

He did not want his district to participate in Race to the Top funding, and his board agreed.

His district refused to sign the state’s RTTT application.

He opposes the RTTT emphasis on rating teachers by test scores.

Montgomery County has a widely hailed teacher evaluation system called Peer Assistance and Review, and Starr wants to keep it.

He recognizes that NCLB and Race to the Top are a reversion to an “industrial model” of education.

Faced with the bewildering roll-out of federal and state mandates, Starr proposed a three-year moratorium on all standardized tests, “while we figure all this out.”

According to the Washington Post article about him from last April:

“Starr critiqued the growth models and rubrics being developed as contradicting research on what motivates teachers. He said Montgomery’s current system, which mentors struggling teachers for a year before decisions about termination are made, is a “hill to die on.”

And he said that singling out teachers as the culprit for education failures and shaming them is the most “pernicious part of the national reform movement.”

Accountability for student success should rightly extend to “you, me, and the entire community,” he said.

But in the midst of all the flux and change, he struck a hopeful chord. He said the transition could give Montgomery a chance to carve a distinct path.

“As No Child Left Behind is dying its slow death, it’s an incredible opportunity to fill that void with what we believe we should do for kids,” he said.”

Joshua Starr is an educational leader of the highest caliber.

He doesn’t comply and follow harmful orders.

He insists on thinking what is best for students and teachers and the community.

My friends at The Chalkface have thrown themselves into the fight to support public education, with a radio show, videos, and blogs.

Now they let you know–in language you won’ t hear from me–about the latest reformer attack on teacher education. The reformers want Arne Duncan to ignore the objections of major institutions of higher education. They want him to adopt regulations that would judge teacher education programs by the test scores of the students of their graduates.

Got that. The test scores of the students taught by the graduates of these institutions.

This is guaranteed to make teaching to the test the official doctrine of American education, top to bottom. It means imposing NCLB on higher education.

It is absurd. It is reckless. It is ___________. (Fill in the blank.)

This letter is posted on Facebook. The parent sent it to me:

Dear (school principal),

This letter is to respectfully inform you of the decision my husband and I have made to opt our children out of the 3rd grade STAAR tests on Apr. 24 and 25 and the make-up tests on Apr. 26 and 27. We understand it is Austin ISD’s position that “by law there is no opt out for students” and that even though the test will not count towards school ratings this year, our children’s “unexcused” absences may negatively impact the school’s Adequate Yearly Progress report. We have been active, involved members of the school community, and our family has always supported the school and its many wonderful teachers, but after long and careful thought about what is best for our children and a great deal of reading on the topic of high-stakes standardized testing, we feel we must act on our convictions and engage in civil disobedience rather than be coerced into participating in a testing system that is deeply flawed morally and pedagogically, the result of corporate greed and political agendas that do not serve our children or anyone else’s.

The decision to engage in civil disobedience is not an easy one, and I would like to explain how we came to it. Our opt out story begins exactly two years ago when David, then a first-grader, came home from school and blurted out, “I hate the TAKS test!” At a loss to understand how he could be so upset about a test he didn’t have to take, I started asking questions and was stunned to learn that his class had had a substitute most of TAKS week because his teacher was required to serve as a proctor for the test. The substitute, it seems, was little more than an unenthusiastic babysitter who sat at her desk and handed out worksheets day after day. As David understood it, she told the children they couldn’t use the bathroom so much because the noise of the flushing toilet would disturb a child testing in the next room.

As the mother of first graders, the TAKS had barely been on my radar, but when I questioned David further, I was upset to have to learn from my seven-year-old what impact the TAKS was having on the entire school: all specials and recess had been cancelled not only for testing grades but for every grade.

In his email to school administrators explaining that “Parents may not opt out of testing of any kind,” AISD General Counsel Mel Waxler encourages “parents who believe the standardized tests place undue pressure on their students . . . to meet with their child’s school counselor to develop solutions tailored to their child’s needs.” But “undue pressure” is endemic in high-stakes testing! When schools are virtually hermetically sealed during testing weeks, when all visitors, mentors, and parents who just want to have lunch with their child in the cafeteria are virtually banned from the school, when everyone must tiptoe and whisper in the hallways, when adults responsible for children’s well-being tell them they can’t go to the bathroom because the toilet flushing makes too much noise, children absorb it all, and the damage is done. I vividly recall my own “culture shock” seeing the window in the door of the testing coordinator’s office covered in black construction paper. No matter that I was an adult who didn’t have to take the test, even I felt anxious.

It was after I posted a rant on the school listserv the following fall, hoping to start a discussion with the new school year, that I learned I needed to redirect my outrage. Without legislative change, the teachers and administrators, too, are under “undue pressure,” trapped in an education system in which there is way too much emphasis placed on standardized test scores.

I learned from talking with you after your STAAR presentation on March 20 that what children endured with the TAKS was even worse than I had realized. I had had no idea that because the test had no time limit, some children were still testing at 5:30pm and later, laying their head down to nap when too tired to continue. Since the STAAR is timed, hopefully no child will be testing into the evening, but a four-hour exam for third graders is still far too long.

You explained to me that it’s not really a four-hour test but a four-hour testing window, and you fully expected the third-graders to finish the test in 2 to 2 1/2 hours, after which they would return to their usual schedule.

I’m still concerned that most of testing week will be far from “learning as usual.” First of all, Ms. A, the AISD administrator you referred me to, confirmed that the test will contain field test items and “the inclusion of field test items will make for a longer [than four-hour] exam.” Almost certainly there will be at least a few children who use most or all of the time allowed, so for two days in a row many children may be forced to sit in their seats after finishing a long, stressful exam and read silently for over an hour while others struggle to finish the test. Also, unlike a normal day, not only are all specials cancelled but so, too, are afterschool classes, which I cannot understand the need for now that there is a time limit on the test and presumably no students will be testing anywhere in the school at that time. The sad irony is that it’s the creativity class that’s cancelled.

I’m even more concerned about the quality of the test. The dearth of information from TEA about how the STAAR was written and field-tested casts doubt on the validity of the test itself as an assessment tool. Are the test items fair and well written? Do they measure what they’re intended to measure?

I emailed Ms. A with several questions about the STAAR. First, I asked if I might be able to see not only sample test questions but also the corresponding standards a sample question assesses to help clarify for me the difference between standards for the “current year’s grade,” vs. “readiness for the next grade” vs. “readiness for the year after that” (from your PowerPoint presentation). Without examples, this is obfuscating language. It seems to me that success at the current grade in itself should indicate readiness for what comes next. Ms. A took the time to send me what sample test items she could, and I sincerely appreciate the effort she put into her reply to my email, just as I do yours. Unfortunately, what I was looking for is not available.

The only information I could find pertaining to STAAR field-testing on the TEA website states, “field-test items will, for the most part, be imbedded in the actual test,” (as Ms. A confirmed) but nothing about how the test has been field-tested. After reading the Pearson test passage about a sleeveless pineapple that’s been in the news and learning that same nonsensical passage with its ridiculous questions has been in several Pearson tests, I’m more skeptical than ever about the quality of test items on the STAAR, which is produced by Pearson.

Based on all I’ve read, even if I could confirm the test questions are valid and well written, I still could not agree with you that the STAAR is of value to parents because, as you say, it will “provide valuable information on [a] child’s performance relative to others in the school, district, and state.” Just as researchers have rejected TAKS test results as bad data, so, no doubt, will they dismiss the results of the STAAR, another criterion-based test with arbitrary passing scores, which won’t even be decided for this year’s test until fall!

How did we get here? The obsession with high-stakes testing, it seems, began with NCLB; Education Commissioner Robert Scott recently called the current system a “perversion” of what was originally intended. Even when research shows that standardized testing is a poor measure of both student learning and educator effectiveness, even when we know a test-driven curriculum does not “promote innovation, creativity, problem solving, collaboration, communication, and critical thinking” (National Resolution on High-Stakes Testing), our legislators pretend the emperor has clothes. Why?

Superintendent John Kuhn speaks truth to power when he says, “Follow the money and you will find where our education dollars go and who benefits the most from those dollars. You will not find teachers. You will not find students. You will not find parents. You will not find effective teaching and learning. You will find Pearson [with whom the state of Texas has a $500 million contract] and legislators,” and “when it’s about profit, it’s not about kids.”

A system that fails to cultivate creativity and innovation will never prepare our children for the future. “The Creativity Crisis” describes Indiana University professor Jonathan Plucker’s tour of China, where “there has been widespread education reform to extinguish the drill-and-kill teaching style. Instead, Chinese schools are also adopting a problem-based learning approach. Plucker recently toured a number of such schools in Shanghai and Beijing. He was amazed by a boy who, for a class science project, rigged a tracking device for his moped with parts from a cell phone. When faculty of a major Chinese university asked Plucker to identify trends in American education, he described our focus on standardized curriculum, rote memorization, and nationalized testing. ‘After my answer was translated, they just started laughing out loud,’ Plucker says. ‘They said, “You’re racing toward our old model. But we’re racing toward your model, as fast as we can.”‘”

As strongly as we feel against high-stakes testing, we would not be opting our children out without their full support. When it came time to ask both boys, “What would you say if I told you that you could choose whether to take the STAAR test or not?” David started cheering and hugged me and Paul grinned. I’ve explained to them the gist of what I’ve learned and assured them that we know and their teachers know they’re fully capable of passing the test; opting out has nothing to do with concern they won’t pass. They understand that they will miss out on a post-test celebration, and they’re fine with it. “That’s okay, Mom, I’ve missed other parties.”

In fact, I briefly considered asking their teachers if they would allow them to do a research project as an alternative challenge to earn the right to attend the party, but when I started to tell David and Paul about my idea, I got no further than “research project.” David, who this year grew from a fact sponge into a researcher, was literally bouncing up and down with excitement, “I LOVE research projects! I want to research more about deep ocean creatures and learn more about creatures I haven’t studied yet! I want to make a poster, I love making posters!” Paul, who loves learning about the natural world just as much as his brother, was very excited, too. At that moment I realized they really just want to learn and have fun doing it, no reward necessary, and the knot in my stomach over the decision to opt out completely disappeared.

We are taking full advantage of opt out week and David and Paul will be night fishing in Port Aransas and visiting the Texas State Aquarium, where they will gather information for a poster display. On Thursday they will have a tour of Amy’s Ice Cream, go to Amy’s website for a reading scavenger hunt, and use the menu for math practice.

To conclude, our reasons for opting out of the STAAR are twofold: to do what we feel is best for our children and to protest against the high-stakes testing industry by choosing not to participate in it. Now that the school board has passed the resolution on high-stakes testing, my hope is that the momentum will build and the legislature will gather the political will to tackle real education reform. When you see David and Paul next week, you might ask them what they learned this week. If you do, you’re likely to be buried under a happy avalanche of information about the ocean and ice cream.

Sincerely,
Texas Parent Against High-Stakes Testing

Jonathan Pelto reports that Paul Vallas, the interim superintendent of Bridgeport, CT, has ordered that students there take three rounds of tests in addition to the Connecticut state tests.

This is indicative of a common fallacy among education reformers. They tend to think that the cure for low test scores is to take more tests. They think that the answer to low scores is to raise standards even higher.

By taking more tests, students will learn how important the tests are, they will get used to taking tests, they will be more ready for the next test. The problem with this reasoning is that testing is not teaching. Students are learning test-taking skills, which have no real value outside of K-12 schooling. This is not a skill in high demand anywhere else. More time for testing means less time for teaching. Less time for teaching means less time for learning.

Raising standards higher when kids can’t reach the ones you have is pointless. It’s like saying that if 50% of the children can’t jump over a 3-foot bar, the answer is to raise it to 4-feet. Next stop: grade inflation and credit recovery.

Bottom line: dumbing down education.

What these students need: more and better instruction.

 

John Kuhn, superintendent of the Perrin-Whitt Independent School District in Texas,  is a hero superintendent. He has been a voice of reason and at the same time an exemplar of passion and courage since he burst onto the national stage a year ago at the national Save Our Schools rally in Washington, D.C. 

That is when many people discovered this fearless advocate for education and children.

He has said loud and clear that schools must serve the neediest children and raise them up, not avoid them for fear of dragging down the school’s ranking and scores.

He has taken to the national arena to oppose high-stakes testing.

He has encouraged those who want to boycott testing.

See here and here and here too.

If every superintendent were as outspoken as John Kuhn, we could take this nation back from the privatizers and restore our ideals and mission.