A few days ago at a student forum, a young woman asked President Obama, "Could you reduce the amount of tests?"
The President didn't say yes. What he did say is that "we have piled on a lot of standardized tests on our kids." He asserted that such tests should be given only "occasionally" as at his daughters' private school, and even then the tests shouldn't have high-stakes attached. "Too often," he said, "what we've been doing is using these tests to punish students or to, in some cases, punish schools."
Some folks were amazed to hear this strong statement against misuse and overuse of standardized tests from a president whose Department of Education is prepared to expand standardized testing to unprecedented levels in its proposal for reauthorizing federal education laws.
How do the President and Education Secretary Arne Duncan reconcile these seemingly opposite positions?
They use two words: better tests.
Here it is in a White House press release from last month, titled "President Obama Calls on Congress to Fix No Child Left Behind Before the Start of the Next School Year":
NCLB status quo: Rely on unsophisticated bubble tests to grade students and schools.The Obama Plan: Support better tests.
And here's how we're supposed to get those "better tests":
The recently completed common core state standards define what K-12 students need to know in order to be prepared for college and career. These national standards have been adopted by 43 states and the District of Columbia. Work is now beginning on new assessments for these standards. The Department of Education has already issued $350 million for the project.
Most states have joined one of two groups developing these tests, either the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) and SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC).
A recent report offers detailed information about the groups' emerging proposals and their challenges in creating this "new generation" of tests.
The thing that jumped out at me from the pages of this report was that they really don't know how to do what they plan to do.
Here are some direct quotes (emphasis added):
PARCC plans to press for advances in automated scoring, including the use of artificial intelligence (p. 9).
Studies will need to be carried out to gain deeper understanding than we currently have to support these decisions (p. 15).
Designing these components such that they can be placed onto a common scale and equated from year to year may require new approaches (p. 16).
New advances are needed to produce reliable sub-scores for both writing and the content area constructs assessed (p. 16).
A number of technical and psychometric challenges will be investigated during the development phase to determine if and how the scores from these multiple components can be aggregated to yield valid, reliable and legally defensible scores (p. 9).
I shared some of these quotes with a group of visiting assessment professionals from the Ukraine a while ago. They told me that they would be fired if they knew so little about what they were doing, and they were in the US to learn from us about assessment.
It's pretty clear that lots of people, possibly from the President on down, don't really know that the "new generation of tests" doesn't exist, nor it is likely ever to exist.
Meanwhile, plans are being made state by state and district by district for more and higher stakes to be attached to tests because they are going to be "better" under the new federal education law.
The test developers say that there are "unresolved challenges" in creating these tests.
I say that we -- and our children -- can't afford to risk so much on those promises of "better tests."
Follow Julie Woestehoff on Twitter: www.twitter.com/pureparents
Steve Nelson: Lipstick on the Pig of American Education
The Associated Press: Obama says too much testing makes education ...
Obama Pushing Congress On Education Reform
How Standardized Testing Damages Education | FairTest
Grade 6 students are expected to dump a bunch of unit blocks into a rectangular prism with fractional edge lengths to prove the formula for volume. Unit cubes are usually 1 unit, not fractional units, so dumping unit blocks into any prism with fractional edges will leave holes which mean the objective of the standard is impossible to achieve, unless the blocks are fractional blocks, in which case then the blocks aren't unit blocks.
So, how to test this? Does someone observe 6th graders putting blocks into a rectangular prism, counting them, and then comparing the counted total to the total they arrived at by applying the formula for volume?
For Grade 2 students have to "Fluently add and subtract within 100" in one standard and then "Add and subtract within 1000" in another. What's the difference between fluently adding/subtracting and just adding/subtracting and how do you test to ascertain that different level of understanding?
Here's the big one that no one wants to discuss. As we all know standards and assessments drive instruction, which means these poor standards and their crummy assessments will define the curriculum our schools follow. That's the big fish.
I do believe, however, that some people are sincerely misguided, rather than purposefully trying to dismantle the public education. I would include Pres. Obama, Secy. Duncan, and quite a few others in this group. What these sincere proponents of "better tests" (i.e., tests that are completely reliable, valid, and meaningful) don't understand is that NO SUCH TEST EXISTS, AND NO SUCH TEST WILL EVER EXIST. Someone's judgement is always required in education, whether it is the teacher's judgement or a test maker's judgement about which question to ask and how to frame it.
Personally, I'll take the teacher's judgement.
Amazing the debater doesn't know that it all a sham to flunk public schools, fire teachers, make money off of public schools, and bust unions. Course Obama's kids won't have to get near this kind of oppression; they will continue to have a lovely education at a rich private school.
Teachers and education professionals have always egaged in a search for how to measure what kids know and how they think both normative and formative purposes - trying to find out how smart the kid is and trying to found out where to go from here to esnure that the kid learns as much as possible. Teachers do this everyday.
Nothing in Race to the Top, School Improvement Grants or proposed NCLB reauthorization calls for more "standardized" testing. They all call for examining measures of student growth, which are not necessarily standardized tests, and they call for uniform (common standards), reliable (results will be the same every time) and valid (this really does what it says it does) standardized tests. There is no "more" testing in this. And it is fallacious to suggest that uniform, reliable and valid standardized tests are an unreachable goal.
I think Ms. Woestehoff needs to stick to her roots has a parent advocate and get parents involved in local schools. She would be much more persuasive and effective than the role of union advocate and assessment specialist that she is striving for.
(or shouldn't) care about or try to understand the assessment systems that are being proposed?
You are wrong about the future requirements for testing under SIG, RTTT, etc. What could be more standardized than computer-based national tests? Read the reports referenced in my article and you will learn that they are all about standardized assessments. "Growth" models are simply another way of using standardized test scores.
I'm not saying that uniform, valid, and reliable tests are an unreachable goal - however, I am saying that currently, people directly involved with trying to create these assessments have serious concerns and questions, and the public needs to know that in order to evaluate the claims of Arne Duncan and President Obama that we are going to have better tests.
The people or organizations that need to be scrutinized and judged are the ones that couldn't solve the problems in the first place. Not the last one you turn to for help!
Have they ever been involved in starting a business, group or organization in an attempt to solve a problem?
Have they ever written about any issue or problem with a local, state or national representative or union leader?
Elementary History: Federal government has three parts.
Executive Branch(President)
The President's JOB Description ; Commander-in-Chief, protect our nation from attack. Enforces the laws that Congress makes. Entertain foreign guests. Recognize foreign countries. Grant reprieves & pardons. Make treaties Nominate Cabinet and Supreme Court Justices, Appoint Ambassadors (with the approval of the Senate). Veto bills, Sign bills. Talks with foreign countries. Make suggestions about new laws...(President cannot declare war, decide how federal money will be spent, interpret or make laws.)
That's some job description!
Legislative(Senate and House of Representatives)
The Legislative branch is called Congress. CONGRESS MAKES OUR LAWS! Congress has 2 parts. One part is called the Senate. 100 Senators(2 from each state). Other part is called the House of Representatives. Representatives meet together to discuss ideas and decide if these ideas (bills) should become laws. There are 435 Representatives. The number of representatives each state gets is determined by its population.
Judicial (Supreme Court & lower Courts) ; interpret laws according to the Constitution.
Discuss the phrase-The Shot Heard 'Round the World.
What is the limitation of space travel?
What do mean by average?
The founders of our country were men of The Enlightenment.Discuss how that influenced our society and government.
In evolution compare and & contrast: natural and sexual selection.
Discuss the significance of "taking the fifth."
Why is it colder on mountain tops even though closer to the sun?
Explain the phases of the moon.
These sort of questions cannot be guessed because one must really know & understand, what true education is all about.
americans want quick and easy answers and solutions to their problems and big solutions not small ones. the home run mentality.
life is about process so a results oriented society will fail. look around that failure is everywhere and getting worst by the year.
business school and wall street mentality is coming to america's schools and it wont be pretty.
and the teachers will be blamed for teaching to the tests and cheating on the tests and the american results oriented mentality will not be given a second glance.
americans actually take pride in their results oriented culture as it takes them to third world status.
1. We test too much, including practicing taking tests. Mandated tests are piled up on our own tests and decreases the amount of time kids are actually learning.
2. Cheating on high stakes tests is rampant and I'm not talking about the kids. Teachers and administrators don't want to look bad or have their schools closed and there's a million subtle ways to do it.
3. There is a growing economic discrepancy in this country and we feel it big time as teachers. It effects our schools, salaries, the help kids are getting outside of class, the culture that surrounds our kids, the attitudes and goals or our students, etc. I teach a lot of kids whose parents are making minimum and around the clock to survive, have very little education themselves, who don't speak English and often have to move to find work. People like to say we can't control this but its a political choice we are making.
4. We have way too many meetings and institute days ("training") and whatnot that pull us out of class and brings in substitutes. Not nearly as much learning goes on when substitutes are brought in. Unions and administrators need to work together that these aren't done during school and are efficient with our time. Let teachers teach and give them more days to do it. Year round schooling is a good idea too.
I am a special ed teacher. I work with students who have learning and behavior problems. Our school calendar is 182 days, and we are on the block schedule. Therefor I see my students 91 days. 30 of the days I was forced to give my students district assessments. I agree that students should be given assessments so I can adapt my instruction. However almost 30 percent of my instruction should not be testing. I could use those days to actually teach.
I'm involved with my kids school work every day. Making sure they do their homework, write neatly, teaching them to navigate through and untie the knot of a tough homework assignment, etc. My wife volunteers at three schools.
If parents aren't going to get involved with their kids' education even on the basic level of "hey kiddo, show me what your homework was today," they shouldn't have lofty expectations.
I'm still waiting to witness the national conversation we need to have regarding parental involvement. Trust me, I've voiced my opposition to crazy ideas for teaching (Mandarin for 5th grade suburban kids?), and how suburban property tax dollars go toward patching holes in urban school districts, but come on, this conversation needs to happen if we're going to be honest and address all ills regarding education in the U.S.
If a ship is sinking, self preservation dictates that all the holes in the hull get addressed, not just the politically expedient ones.
hang on to your hats teachers wall street instant results and business school mentality is coming to your schools.
look how well these business school teachings of competition and pay for performance and individualistic rankings has worked on wall street.
please is there one person in politics and educational gurus that understands significant variables.
student tests are only one significant variable to measure a teachers performance. there are several including parents, income levels, results oriented culture, teacher centered class rooms, leadership, maybe class size, how the class was set up,
So yes, better tests, and fewer; clearer, unambiguous standards about what is to be learned, what skills are to be locked away at what level and when.
And even more important: More guidance for the whole cadre of teachers about effective instruction and classroom management that can transform low level veteran performers into master practitioners. If you don't do that one, the creation and publication of standards alone is meaningless.
ie x-spert meaning an unknown drip under pressure.
lets bring business school pay for performance objectives into our classrooms.
after all this insanity worked so well on wall st reet and the big banks and the big three auto it only took a few trillion to bail them out. of course they are right back doing the same things with the same results.
we americans are an interesting nation in spite of the evidence of self destruction we want more of the same. dont we like ourselves or what?
now lets screw up our kids and not just stop at wall street greed and self destruction put this insanity right into our class rooms of even 5 year olds.
teachers will teach to the tests and many will find ways to beat the system, even cheating, and we will blame the teachers and not the ignorance of the system. wait and rhee. pun intended.
go rhee go, americans are waiting for your easy and instant answers to the ed problem.
before I retired as a consultant most organizations wanted a two day seminar to fix their employees and of course never the leadership. ie never. two day fix after generations of unawareness; go figure.
I have an idea to make you happy...lets do away with tests.. EVERYONE GOES TO HARVARD, YALE AND MIT
WE ADMIT BY FIRST COME FIRST SERVED..
I mean come on its the only fair way...
http://supportpubliceducation.blogspot.com/2011/01/why-test-scores-are-failing-us.html