Nov
09
Teaching to the test
Who thinks No Child Left Behind is a good idea? I haven’t met any parent or teacher who supports it.
Dgmom743 posed a question that for many of us has a clear answer: No.
Any law or practice that promotes standardized tests as the sole measure of achievement is not only a bad idea, it’s a treacherous one that bodes ill for local control of our schools.
In recent weeks D58 administrators have underscored how closely their curriculum and new standards-based report cards hew to the state’s learning standards and how well the district has performed on the Illinois Standards Achievement Test, which is the state’s NCLB barometer.
While it can only be good news that the district has exceeded Adequate Yearly Progress as defined by NCLB, many parents continue to have serious misgivings about the ISAT as the key indicator of how well our students are learning
The test’s extended-response math and reading questions and writing test require considerable classroom time to master — but whether they represent a triumph of education or simply rote training is debatable.
The standards represented by the test also have come under fire. A federal report found Illinois was among 15 states that lowered standards in one or more areas between 2005 and 2007 in an effort to stay ahead of NCLB targets. Further, by grouping “meets and exceeds” categories together, it’s difficult to assess just how accomplished our students actually are.
Finally, no matter how successful our local schools may — or may not — be in meeting state or national standards, such standards are unlikely to represent the goals and interests of our community.
The beauty of locally funded education is local control of the schools, although in reality that practice has given way in recent decades to state standards, organizational philosophies and complacence on the part of parents who are content that great test scores equal great education.
Does anyone truly believe that Springfield or Washington knows best how to educate our children to our standards? Or that state standards should be the basis for evaluating teachers and determining their pay?
One of the chief reasons I am a long-time advocate of more involved and active school boards is because I see those elected representatives as guarding our local interests and looking out for what is best for our children rather than conceding that task to bureaucrats in distant offices.
Yet, for some reason, too many school boards have allowed their purpose and role to be defined by the Illinois Association of School Boards, a state interest group with no statutory authority.
While it’s true that choosing a superintendent is a board’s first duty and also true that school board members have no place in district administration, there is nothing in the School Code that denies them an active role in defining and communicating an educational vision and mission.
Maybe the parents and taxpayers of this district have an opinion on the advisability of sex education or the use of primary sources or classroom enrichment or any of a number of decisions that would mark our schools as a reflection of our community.
While standardized tests are designed to measure student achievement in basic areas such as reading, writing, math, science and social studies, does that require us to limit our children’s classroom experiences to the standard?
While “standard” may be necessary to ensure a basic education to all — and I’m not convinced NCLB is the best or only way to make that happen — it would be a shame to look no farther than that arbitrary standard.
Maybe it’s time for parents and teachers who disdain the impact of NCLB to ask their schools to do what all good students do: Aim higher.
Elaine, I must admit that when I see a statement like “…such [state or national] standards are unlikely to represent the goals and interests of our community”, it makes me wonder: How different are our local educational standards from state and national standards?
Do we feel that our kids should read a little bit worse than the national standard? Is it okay for our kids to only master some of the math that the state requires? What EXACTLY about the state or national standards is not appropriate for our kids? Are those standards so extreme?
While I certainly don’t like the idea of “teaching to the test”, I would hope that those tests represent some norm of educational achievement that a balanced, normal curriculum should be able to meet sufficiently for all students. I can’t imagine that the educators who developed the state and national tests were aiming at the top 10% of students with the tests.
Perhaps the problem is the dilution of basic education? Lack of discipline? A need to teach to the level of the lowest students, which prevents the rest of the class from progressing as quickly as they could, instead of separating out some students for remedial work?
I must admit that I don’t know. While I read the papers (and this blog) and have attended DG 58 and DG 99 school board meetings in the past, my sons attended parochial schools, so I don’t have a personal “parent” view of what the local public schools are doing right and wrong.
Anyone want to enlighten me?
Good questions, Bob.
My point is not that state standards aren’t useful, but that they are limited and maybe even mediocre, particularly when the entire “meets” and “exceeds” categories are taken into account.
Further, they force schools into teaching certain subjects, such as writing, in a very formulaic way. With all the emphasis that is put on making AYP and meeting standards, there appears to be less time for classroom approaches or subjects that don’t contribute to this goal.
Finally, standards apparently are lowered as necessary to enable states to achieve AYP — indicating that educational goals set in Springfield or Washington may be unfortunately subject to politics.
Again, just my opinion as a parent who has been observing the test, and it’s impact on local education, since it was instituted 10 years ago.
But I’m not a professional educator and I may be missing something. I’d love to hear from those who are more favorably disposed than I am.
The problem that I see with state and national standards is that the standard changes based on the administration in office. This seems whacked out to me. We should get rid of the national and state educational systems, save some tax dollars and let the communities run their own schools. It worked in the past and it will work again.
I am a perfect example of how standardized tests do not always tell the whole truth. I was a horrible test taker. Always was and always will be. I placed very low on those IL state tests as a kid and only scored aggregate of 19 on my ACT. Yet I graduated college with a 3.2 GPA. So I guess the moral of this story is that standardized tests should be a guide to how the general population is fairing, but not the gospel. Our educational system should not be based solely on these tests. There are plenty of very smart kids who may not test well but are very good students and achieve high marks in school. So my concern is that we teach the basics and teach them well. I believe teaching to the average and then putting the over achievers into gifted classes and the lower achieving students into a tutorial program. That has always worked.
“I’d love to hear from those who are more favorably disposed than I am.”
Don’t hold your breath. In 2014 100% of students are supposed to pass NCLB. The bar’s gotta go into the dirt for that to happen. Some standard of excellence.
Bob,
Many teachers nationwide have also complained about NCLB because of the constant assessment testing. I’ve read stories of teachers preparing a month in advance to teach to the test, while they neglect or postpone other lessons. Insanity.
Biggest problems?
Parents who accept and sit by idly.
Teachers who remain silent for fear of their job.
School Boards who beg for Federal funds and acquiesce to all demands.
When will we have enough? When will we demand more control?
The answer in my house is to do more work. We don’t depend up on the State. My kids aren’t always appreciative of the extra work we give them; I have hope that someday they will be.
“Further, they force schools into teaching certain subjects, such as writing, in a very formulaic way.” Amen, sister.
A specific complaint I have relates not only to NCLB but to the state tests as well: they evaluate not that the child can come up with the right answer, but HOW the child comes up with the answer. If you have a child who thinks differently, they are considered WRONG.
This handicaps both teachers and students, in my opinion. If the question is “what is 1/2 of 50?” why should it matter if the student got the answer by picturing two quarters in her head to come up with 25, or used the “official” methodology? And where is the freedom of the teacher to come up with innovative teaching techniques to meet the needs of his students?
The tests don’t simply measure if the students can answer, they regiment thinking and teaching as well. And discourage individuality. And that does NOT sit well with me.
I remember when the extend-response questions you reference first came about, dgmom.
My son was in about third grade and I was on our school improvement team. That type of question seemed so foreign and counter-intuitive that I asked the teachers on the committee whether anyone, adult or child, could get it right (whether or not they could accurately perform the computation) without being “taught” how to do it. The answer: No.
If that’s not teaching to the test, I don’t know what is.
As an aside, I think my son got a 100% on computation that year and a 0 on the extended response. Goes to show how much he knew.
The education system works for us not the other way around. Its the same way with the government. We need to take both back!!