Jessica Azpeitia
June 28, 2010
ECI 696
Final Project: Standardized Testing
A problem that is affecting schools is the emphasis on standardized testing. In an article in Education Week, Alfie Kohn used a perfect metaphor to describe what standardized testing is doing to our schools. Kohn says “standardized testing has swelled and mutated, like a creature in one of those old horror movies, to the point that it now threatens to swallow our schools whole” (Kohn, 2000). Educational state leaders are using only standardized test scores to check for accountability by students and teachers, but they are not realizing how standardized tests are negatively affecting schools, students, teachers, and parents. As the years progress, schools are requiring teachers to give students more tests throughout the year. Standardized tests are affecting the curriculum being taught in schools; how teachers educate their students; the amount of meaningful learning taking place in a classroom; and the negative impacts taking place (as in emotional impact or material impact) on students, teachers, and schools. Teachers are given the task to review the scores and base lessons using the results of the tests. Our “test obsessed” society started when the NCLB Act was implemented in 2001. According to the Act, standardized testing encourages accountability in public schools, offers parents greater educational options for their children, and helps close the achievement gap between minorities and white students. One question comes to mind: Why only use standardized tests to check for accountability? In my paper, I want to provide an argument that explains why standardized testing needs to be limited in the classrooms and how it exploits the youth of America. Also, I will describe events that have occurred due to an over-abundance of testing. Lastly, I will suggest actions and alternatives that can be implemented in order to solve the problem.
The obsession of standardized tests is becoming a significant problem in the United States. According to The Washington Post, “no topic in education sparks as much debate and division as testing especially standardized testing.” An advocate of standardized testing believes the best tools to show accountable by students, teachers, and schools are standardized tests. On the other hand, “the opponents are arguing tests prove nothing more than that some kids are better at taking tests than others” (Strauss, 2006). The question I asked myself: Should tests be completely eliminated? The obvious answer is absolutely not, but we need to limit the amount of tests students are taking throughout the school year. “The testing culture has a lot more momentum than it should," said Harvard University education professor Daniel Koretz, an expert on assessment and measurement. He said a lack of solid research on the results of the new testing regimen or those that predated No Child Left Behind essentially means that the country is experimenting with its young people” (Strauss, 2006). If there is no research on the benefits of standardized testing, then I do not understand why the United States has become “obsessed” with standardized testing.
This problem is affecting the students, teachers, and parents. According to Alfie Kohn, “talented teachers have abandoned the profession after having been turned into test-prep technicians” (Kohn, 2010). Some of the reasons that support Kohn’s statement are teachers feel pressure associated with high-stakes testing which results in teachers using skill and drill during their instruction to review concepts; there appears to be a consistent increase in test preparation activities in the period immediately preceding the administration of a test, ending abruptly after the test; and the focus on minimum standards and basic skills have diminished both the richness and depth of the curriculum and professional autonomy over curricular and instructional decisions. Basically, teachers are being critiqued according to their students’ test scores. Unfortunately, this is not a reliable strategy. There can be a variety of reasons on why a teacher’s students have low scores. He/She can have many ELL students, who are unable to read the material, or there could be several students, who have learning, physical, or emotional disabilities in the classroom. When the NCLB Act was implemented, it supported the practice of giving all students the same test, under the same conditions; therefore, accommodations would no longer be made for disabled students. Unfortunately, this leads to a conflict between the NCLB Act and IDEA Act. The IDEA Act states that schools must accommodate disabled students during standardized testing. Unfortunately, the NCLB Act neglects the students’ rights and the students are expected to cope with the situation.
Who else is this affecting besides the teacher? The students are negatively being affected, too. One concern I researched was effects standardized testing is having on the talented and gifted students. The emphasis of standardized testing has led talented gifted students to become frustrated by the slow pace of learning and repetitive nature of test preparation. The testing movement also affects gifted students by providing a curricular ceiling that is well below their own academic potential. Is this a concern of the education system? When the NCLB Act was implemented, there was and still are no requirement to have programs that support gifted, talented, and other high-performing students. Is the United States concerned about the talented and gifted students’ education? Sadly, the answer is probably not; otherwise, a program would have been implemented to support these individuals.
Another problem affecting the students is the increase of stress and anxiety students have endured. Teachers put pressure on their students and emphasize the importance of doing well on tests. This pressure can lead students to become exhausted with test taking. The exhaustion can lead to bad behavior, attitudes, cheating, and frustration with school and possibly with the teacher(s). The students’ frustration has led to students protesting or boycotting standardized testing. An event that occurred in a South Bronx middle school in 2008 led 318 students to boycott a 3 hour practice exam that was to prepare them for a statewide social studies test. The students handed in blank exams and submitted a signed petition with a list of grievances to the principal of the school. The petition stated “they were sick and tired of the constant, excessive and stressful testing that causes them to lose valuable instructional time with their teachers.” The following statement was made by the students “the school is oppressing us too much with all these tests. They don't think we have brains of our own, like we're robots” (Gonzalez, 2008). Unfortunately, this is not the only protest that has occurred in the United States, many have taken place involving teachers, parents, and students. Many parents have become concerned with their children’s education and the use of standardized testing. Parents are witnessing the effects testing has on their children. Some parents have taken drastic measures by removing their children from public schools and started home schooling their children. Some parents have called testing “a waste of taxpayer’s money.” Parents feel their children are receiving a test-prep overload. While researching parental reactions to standardized testing, I came across a Facebook page titled Parents and Kids Against Standardized Testing. On the page, they are organizing protests against the issue. This issue has the concern of teachers, students, and parents, so why hasn’t anything been done to resolve the problem?
Another issue in standardized testing is the inability to measure higher-order thinking. “Standardized exams offer few opportunities to display the attributes of higher-order thinking, such as analysis, synthesis, evaluation, and creativity” (Gale, 2008). These “one-shot” tests contain mostly multiple choice questions. The format of the tests promotes rote memorization instead of critical thinking, problem solving, or creative thinking. The tests do not adequately measure thinking skills or assess what people can do on real-world tasks. Unfortunately, schools require teachers to use tests’ scores to plan lessons or ability group students. To add to the issue, standardized tests have contained high error rates in every major testing program and state in the nation. The validity of the tests have come into question due to mistakes being found, which unfortunately have disastrous effects on the students they are measuring. A situation where a mistake occurred was when a Massachusetts history teacher found an error in one multiple choice question on the states 8th grade high stakes test which resulted in 666 students failing the test who would have other otherwise passed, many of whom were retained (Gale, 2008). “Another incident took place in November 1998, Harcourt Brace misclassified as “below basic” or “basic” elementary students who had actually scored as proficient or advanced levels. The mistake was detected by a principal” (Gale, 2008). These are big mistakes being made by major testing companies, so why are schools relying so heavily on these test results? Are standardized tests a reliable source?
“Across the nation, schools under intense pressure to show better test results have allowed those tests to cannibalize the curriculum” (Kohn, 2001). Due to the pressure and preparation of standardized test, there is little room for creativity in the classroom. Many teachers have become so overwhelmed with the pressures that they have participated in more teaching to the test and less teaching to the students. “Today, teachers focus more on contrived activities, sample test items, timed pre-tests, and other test prep techniques as opposed to research-based best practice methods” (Gale, 2008) Authenticity, meaning, and differentiation are considered less important despite research showing they are key elements in education. Has standardized testing encouraged schools to move from best to bad practice all because of raising test scores? Besides the change of instruction in the classroom other areas have been affected. “Administrators have cut back or even eliminated vital parts of schooling: programs in the arts, recess for young children, electives for high schoolers, class meetings, discussions about current events, the use of literature in the early grades, and entire subject areas such as science” (Kohn, 2001). In some schools, a longer reading block has been implemented; therefore, there is less time for writing. The reason for this is NCLB requires no proficiency in writing. As a result, states have already begun cutting back on writing assessments to save money, which leads to increasingly large numbers of poorly prepared students and employees (Gale, 2008). What else is going to be eliminated from schools?
Besides standardized tests, what else can schools use to assess their students? There are other alternatives that can help teachers test or grade his/her students. One idea is having students create portfolios throughout the school year. The portfolios will include an organized compilation of the academic work the student has done. This collection of academic accomplishments shows off various skills and levels. Each piece of work is carefully chosen to be in the portfolio based on purpose and progress. Academic work can include but is not limited to journal entries, reports, poetry, test results, art, self-assessments, and videotapes. The teacher chooses the work which best demonstrates student’s ability and achievements. A portfolio is an excellent tool that can be shown to parents during conferences and will prove how the students received his/her grades. Another type of assessment being used is technology-based classroom assessments. “Teachers are using new technologies to differentiate instruction and administer tests. The use of technology will facilitate teaching, learning, and assessment processes without altering the classroom-based instruction, tasks, and skills that are being taught and assessed” (Salend, 2009). The technology-based assessment can be used in a variety of ways. An example given in Salend’s article was instead of having students complete a writing test; the students will be assigned to write a blog using a designated writing style that had recently being taught. Another example was demonstrated by a teacher named Ms. Lacasio. She assessed her students’ knowledge by using an interactive whiteboard and having her students respond using their clickers. A question would be written on the interactive whiteboard, and the students’ task was to use their clickers to select the correct answer. She used the students’ responses to determine which students were ready to proceed and which students needed additional help on the concept. Fortunately, the usage of the interactive whiteboard allows teachers to give students prompt feedback.
Some other ideas are teacher observations which involve using checklists and methods like anecdotal and naturalistic. Anecdotal and naturalistic can be time consuming methods because it requires on-going record keeping from the teacher. Other suggestions can include self or peer evaluations where students’ tasks are to evaluate their classmates or themselves; contracted learning where agreements and expectations are arranged by students and teachers; pupil profiles is when students master specific objectives and line graphs are drawn on the record sheet to provide students with a visual representation (Smith, 2003). As I explained above, there are other assessments that can be useful and reliable sources. These assessments can be used to test a students’ knowledge and promote critical thinking, creative thinking, and problem solving. The results of alternatives assessments will give teachers immediate feedback on students who have mastered the standard and students who need extra support. A variety of well-designed classroom-based assessments can provide richer, consistent information that enhances validity, diagnostic, capacity, and the ability to assess programs toward meaningful standards (Gale, 2008).
In order for this problem to get solved, our educational state leaders need to commit themselves to spending a week in classrooms; therefore, they can experience the frustration the students and teachers are enduring. They can also see the pressures teachers are under to prepare students for the tests, administer the tests, and review the data with the hope that scores continue to increase. Hopefully, United States will eventually reevaluate and minimize the use of standardized testing. If not, the standardized testing problem in education is going to continue to get worse. A teacher’s goal is to provide students with high-quality instruction. If we only focus on teaching test material, then the students are going to have gaps in their education and fall behind in school. Those gaps will eventually affect them in their college and professional career. The focus should always be the students, and what will benefit them for the future.
Resources
•Kohn, A. (2000). “Standardized Testing and Its Victims.” Education Week. Retrieved June 24, 2010, from http://www.alfiekohn.org/teaching/edweek/staiv.htm.
•U.S. Department of Education (NCLB). Retrieved June 24, 2010, from http://www2.ed.gov/nclb/landing.jhtml.
•Strauss, V. (2006). “The Rise of the Testing Culture.” The Washington Post. Retrieved June 24, 2010. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/09/AR2006100900925.html.
•Gonzalez, J. (2008). Bronx 8th-graders boycott practice exam but teacher may get ax. The NY Times. Retrieved June 25, 2010. http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/education/2008/05/21/2008-05-21_bronx_8thgraders_boycott_practice_exam_b-1.html#ixzz0rzd6DRBV.
•Thompson Gale. 2008. Standardized Testing. Farmington, Michigan.
•Salend, S. (2009). Technology-Based Classroom Assessments: Alternatives to Testing. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 41(6), 49-58. Retrieved from ERIC database.
•Kohn, A. (2010). Debunking the Case for National Standards. Education Digest: Essential Readings Condensed for Quick Review, 75(8), 4-7. Retrieved from ERIC database.Buck, S.,
•Ritter, G., Jensen, N., & Rose, C. (2010). Teachers Say the Most Interesting Things—An Alternative View of Testing. Phi Delta Kappan, 91(6), 50-54. Retrieved from ERIC database.
•Scherer, M. (2009). The Tests that Won't Go Away. Educational Leadership, 67(3), 5. Retrieved from ERIC database
•Smith, C., & ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading, E. (2003). Alternative Forms of Assessment. ERIC Topical Bibliography and Commentary. Retrieved from ERIC database.
•Kohn, A. (2001). “Fighting the Tests. A Practical Guide to Rescuing Our Schools.” Phi Delta Kappa.