Firstly, high stakes testing steals the authenticity of learning. Instructional times that are usually spent in engaging students in a variety highly effective tasks are replaced with test drilling routines. Teachers are put in a position where instruction is centered around the test, or “teaching to the test” as it is often called. A five-year University of Maryland study found that since No Child Left Behind, there was a decline in the amount of time spent on complex assignments, and in the amount of high cognitive content in the curriculum (“Standardized Tests,”2016). The implication is that time spent on real-life project based learning, experiential learning activities and other hands-on learning activities have also diminished because more time is spent on preparing students for high stakes test. If instructional time is filled with “drill and kill” rote learning, instead of opportunities for students to perform real-life tasks where they demonstrate meaningful application of content, then the authenticity of acquiring and applying skills is greatly diminished. As a DC Public Schools teacher, I have the same concerns as other teachers around my school district who feel that the joy is taken out of learning. Often, real-life problem-based learning takes a back seat to preparing students for the PARCC exams. Even with common core standards, which tell us what students need to know, most of the standards are directly tied to preparing students to pass the PARCC. Little time is left for students to engage in experiential learning that suit their interests.
Secondly, high stake testing take away time from instruction. According to Kamenetz, since No Child Left Behind became federal law, “every state has been required to test every child every year in third through eighth grade in math and reading, plus once in high school. And districts have added many tests to follow on to state-mandated tests ” (“The Past, Present And Future Of High-Stakes Testing,” 2015). With this increase in testing, time for teaching and learning has been affected. For example, in my school, students spend a significant amount of time testing. In fact, as a teacher at District of Columbia Public School (DCPS) I can unequivocally say that across the District of Columbia Public Schools there is excessive testing. DCPS schools must administer testing in three cycles - the beginning of the year, the middle of the year, and the end of the year. The testing window, or the amount of time that teachers and schools have to administer the tests lasts for about fours weeks each cycle. This means a total of twelve weeks of time is set aside for assessments. At my school, the administration, for compliance purposes, has set an internal deadline for testing to be done one week before the district’s deadline for each of the three cycles. Even so, that is a total amount of nine weeks of testing. Some of this testing time could have been spent on students performing tasks that are meaningful and engaging, which result in acquiring of knowledge and skills. As a teacher in this climate, I have to manage instructional time well so that my students are exposed to the best learning experiences while simultaneously preparing them for these tests. The stakes of these tests are very high, and to ignore them would be a mistake.
In addition to internal high stakes testing, additional time is taken away from instruction for standardized testing. Now that DCPS has adapted the common core standards, students in grades 3 through 5 are required to take the new PARCC assessments. In DCPS, every school must submit a schedule of their PARCC testing dates to the Office are of the State Superintendent of Education. This procedure, of submitting a testing schedule to each state’s department of education, is typical in other jurisdictions. These schedules generally have a testing period that can last from two to four weeks. Again, this shows the amount of time that is used for testing insteading of teaching and learning.
Third, excessive testing causes severe distress for students. Anecdotes have illustrated that testing creates anxiety even in the brightest students. Some students have vomited, cried or both during testing(“Standardized Tests,” 2016). This severe stress occurs because students know that if they don’t make the grade there will be dire consequences. This is especially true in cases when students are required to pass a test to move up to the next grade or to graduate. Unfortunately, students in my school, particularly in my class, don’t always handle the pressure of performing. They get stressed out and express to me that they are anxious, nervous and do not want to come to school. I implore them to do their very best and to show what they know. Fortunately, many school districts, including DCPS, have moved away from holding back students for an additional year because of performance on standardized test. This is because it makes better sense for promotion decisions to be based from a holistic performance of a child. In my school, and in my children’s school in Charles County, Maryland, multiple types of assessments are used students to determine how a child is performing in school. Instead of relying solely on a high stakes test, which might be an unreliable measure of students performance, portfolios, observations, teacher-created tests, and other forms of assessments are used to make promotion decisions.
Fourth, high stakes increases teacher turnover rates. Every year, qualified teachers are leaving the profession because they are overwhelmed with the demands of teaching. Richard Ingersoll, a University of Pennsylvania professor who studies teacher turnover and retention, stated that one of the reasons teachers quit is that they feel they have no say in decisions that ultimately affect their teaching.(“Revolving Doors,” 2015). In the District of Columbia, one of such decision where teachers have no input, is the role in which high stakes testing play in the DCPS teachers evaluation system. DCPS uses observations and other measures as a part of IMPACT, the teacher evaluation system. One part of a teacher’s overall evaluation scores is from value-added student achievement data. DCPS uses Individual Value-Added Student Achievement Data (IVA) as a measure of the impact teachers have on their students’ learning over the course of the school year, as evidenced by the results of PARCC assessment. IVA accounts for 35% of a teacher’s IMPACT score. (“General Education Teachers with Individual Value-Added Student Achievement Data,” 2015). Some teachers in the district have found this measure to be unfair and have left the system for other school districts. Other teachers scored low on their overall teacher evaluation, due in part to their students’ low scores on standardized assessments. This resulted in some teachers being placed on probation and other teachers losing their jobs! These kinds of termination decisions are made based on testing results although standardardized tests are an imprecise measure of teacher performance. According to report by Annenberg Institute for School Reform, over 17% of Houston teachers who ranked highly on the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills reading test were ranked among the two lowest on the equivalent Standard Achievement Test (“Standardized Tests,” 2016). This inconsistency is indicative of the imperfection of the high stake scores. Yet, these scores are used as a tool for making decisions about the effectiveness of teachers.
School districts, such as DCPS reward teachers with bonuses when their students score high on standardized tests. The implication of this reward system is that, it views successful is narrowly defined as performance on a high-stakes test. The problem with this line of thinking is that standardized testing only measures a small aspect of education. According to the late education researcher Gerald W. Bracey, standardized tests cannot measure qualities such as “creativity, critical thinking, resilience, motivation, persistence, curiosity, endurance, reliability, enthusiasm, empathy, self-awareness, self-discipline, leadership, civic-mindedness, courage, compassion, resourcefulness, sense of beauty, honesty and integrity” (“Standardized Tests,” 2016). These are characteristics that most effective teachers possess, and which teachers instill in their students. These qualities are long lasting and will undoubtedly lead to success in students whose teachers have impressed these virtues upon them. Yet, standardized tests cannot measure these values. As a result, teachers who deserve to be rewarded for the impact they have on the lives of their students, do not receive the accolades that they have earned.
One the other hand, it is important for teachers to know positive effects of high stakes tests. Standardized tests provide a lot of data that can be used to guide instruction. Standardized tests can also help teacher to focus on essential skills and eliminate busy work for students that don’t result in academic gains (“Standardized Tests,” 2016). Standardized tests also prepare students for the future testing situations for college entrance tests, civil services jobs, and other employment testing prerequisites.
Furthermore, teachers must also be aware of debate around high stakes testing and the implications for the future. Missing from the data about standardized testing is what could replace annual tests. Several suggestions have been made to create a balance, including stealth assessment where students practice math and English on computer programs. These programs, such as Khan Academy, register all the answers a student gives. Stealth assessments show which skills a student has mastered at a given moment and the pattern of answers potentially offers insights into how quickly students learn, how diligent they are and other big-picture factors. (“The Past, Present And Future Of High-Stakes Testing,” 2015).
Other alternatives to high stakes testing are the use of multiple measures. There are various assessments that can be incorporated into student and school performance- including game-based assessments, video based assessments and performance or portfolio-based assessments. Schools around the country are incorporating direct demonstrations of student learning into their assessment programs. These include projects, individual and group presentations, reports and papers and portfolios of work collected over time. (“The Past, Present And Future Of High-Stakes Testing,” 2015).
In conclusion, high stakes testing are a big part of the culture of schooling in the United States. Although the use of high stakes have led to noticeable improvement in data-driven results in education, high stakes testing have inadvertently caused setbacks for schools, educators and students. The stakes of these tests are very high, and to ignore them would be a mistake. Consequently, all stakeholders must adapt to this climate of testing. Students must do their best to show what they know on high stakes testing. Teachers must take these tests seriously and do the best they can in preparing their students for them. Lastly,schools and school districts must set reasonable parameters so that there is a balance between testing and instructional time.
Works Cited
General Education Teachers with Individual Value-Added Student Achievement Data Group 1 [Booklet] (2015). Retrieved from http://dcps.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dcps/publication/attachments/Group%201.pdf
Revolving Door Of Teachers Costs Schools Billions Every Year [information on a Page] (2015, March 30). Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2015/03/30/395322012/the-hidden-costs-of-teacher-turnover
Standardized Tests[Information on a page] (2016, June 2). Retrieved from http://standardizedtests.procon.org/
No comments:
Post a Comment