To protest curiousity-crushing test prep, Penn State Professor Timothy Slekar told his 11-year-old son to write “I prefer not to take your test” on the state exam.
He has been forced to complete worksheets in language arts and mathematics. He can alphabetize spelling words and find the main idea of a paragraph. He’s had practice in sequencing. He can round numbers. He can add, subtract, multiply and divide with fractions and decimals. And he has mastered the scripted art of estimating (Who knew there were incorrect estimates?). He has had multiple PSSA practice tests and according to these tests my son is ready.
. . . But what has been lost during these past five months? He sits in social studies and science classes that have been shortened to allow more time for reading and math instruction. He hasn’t been given the opportunity to engage real children’s literature.
Inspired by Slekar, a Pennsylvania mother opted her sons out of testing, falsely claiming a religious objection.
But there’s a backlash against the anti-testing backlash. At Jezebel’s Learning Curves, Anna North argues that testing is necessary, especially for children whose parents lack the “time, education and English proficiency” to monitor their children’s learning and spot when they’re falling behind.
Standardized testing is rarely fun — and it could almost certainly be improved — but it’s not nearly as antithetical to real, deep learning as its detractors suggest. Learning how to study will serve kids well throughout life — and while stimulating curiosity is important, most adults are probably glad our curiosity was supplemented by requirements from time to time.
If well-educated parents scuttle standardized testing, their children are likely to learn critical reading and math skills, North argues. Other people’s children may not.
Like North, I see no problem in teaching Pennsylvania children to find the main idea in a paragraph, or to add, subtract, multiply and divide with fractions and decimals, or to learn sequencing, rounding and estimating. Apparently, the school is teaching in a boring way and without integrating reading and math into history and science. But it is possible to teach reading comprehension and math skills without drudgery.
Standardized testing is not the devil,” writes Robert Pondiscio. “Test prep is the devil.” Time-wasting test prep is most likely to be a problem at high-poverty, low-performing schools, he adds.
At my South Bronx elementary school, we had a Teachers College consultant who encouraged us to ”teach tests as a genre of literature.” But even that pales in comparison to a grad student of mine who was mandated to spend two hours per day on test prep from the first day of school.
Instead of boycotting the tests, parents should demand good teaching, Pondiscio writes.
. . . I would march into the school office the first day of school with the following bargain: “I’m sure you agree the best test prep is great teaching and a robust curriculum, Ms. Principal. So let’s keep our focus right there. Don’t worry about spending my child’s time and your budget dollars on test prep materials. Because if they show up in our kids’ classrooms, we can promise our kids won’t be showing up for the test.”
Pro-testers think anti-testers are like parents who won’t vaccinate their children, suggests Alexander Russo.
-->Filed Under: Testing Tagged With: curiousity, drudgery, history, math, parents, reading, science, test boycott, test prep
About JoanneComments
Roger Sweeny says: March 23, 2011 at 7:39 amThe problem isn’t the testing. It’s putting everyone in the same room and doing the same things. Some kids NEED that help. Some, like Professor Slekar’s kid, don’t. The kids who need the help should get it. The ones who don’t should be doing something else.
Either hire exceptional teachers who can “differentiate instruction” or put kids with different needs in different places.
Happy Elf Mom says: March 23, 2011 at 12:58 pmThank you, Joanne. My liberal friends are driving me nuts with their “my child did well on xyz standardized test, so public education works!” comments on facebook. I am very tempted to tell them that despite their progressive opinions, they really aren’t liberal *enough.* :9
Richard Aubrey says: March 23, 2011 at 1:53 pmTesting and test prep are either good or bad depending how the first tests for actually useful knowledge and how the second prepares for the first. If a test doesn’t test for useful knowledge (not global warming, for example), then it’s useless except to see how well the school teaches to the test.
Don’t see why you can’t design a test to test for useful knowledge. If you do, then learning it will be a two-fer. Test results are good and the kid learns something.
Perhaps many tests are already usefully aimed at useful knowledge and what we have is the mush-head view that memorization is fascist and you don’t have to know stuff. Just think good thoughts according to the Dept of Ed’s Good Thoughts Syllabus.
Cranberry says: March 23, 2011 at 3:59 pmI would have fallen into the “testing is not a problem” camp a few years ago. Having witnessed the effect of high-stakes testing on our local school, I am not a fan. On the plus side, our local school now makes every effort to teach young children to read. The administration has also made it clear to parents and teachers that knowledge of basic math facts is not optional.
After that, however, “teaching to the test” takes hold. In some districts, testing may keep the administrators honest. In other districts, it limits the range and depth of instruction. Any number of items are only taught because they appear on the state tests. What doesn’t appear on the state tests isn’t taught–there isn’t time for them. Writing instruction is divided between what’s necessary for the open response items, and preparation for a creative college application essay.
SuperSub says: March 23, 2011 at 5:04 pmI took standardized tests throughout my school career…and we had plenty of science, social studies, and other subjects taught to us. The difference? NCLB.
The tests were truly used to evaluate students and guide instruction, not to hold over the heads of administrators.
Thinly Veiled Anonymity says: March 23, 2011 at 7:12 pmStandardized tests are supposed to be measures of academic competence — not actual academic accomplishments themselves.
That said, a survey of any kind doesn’t measure what it WANTS to measure; it measures what it measures. In the case of standardized tests, what is measured is how well students do on standardized tests. The question, then, is how well is performance on standardized tests correlated with what it wants to measure, namely academic competence?
That depends, of course, on the test. Some tests are better than others, and the formulaic mass-graded essay tests are somewhere near the bottom of the pile. But if there’s any daylight between the two, between test performance and academic competence, then the former can be addressed independently of the latter.
Continuing to use essay tests as a case study (mindful that the principle can be transferred to other sorts of tests as well), what essay tests are supposed to be measuring is a student’s ability to write. But to the extent that students are conditioned to provide stock, five-paragraph responses to the test prompts, their test performance soars and their actual writing ability plummets, to the dismay of their college instructors. This is precisely because what amounts to excellent performance on the exam is not just different from, but actually at odds with what is supposed to be measured.
That most standardized tests DO have significant gaps between what they measure and what they want to measure can be confirmed simply by looking at the fact of “test prep”. I’ve often said that by far the best preparation for the SAT is 12 years of good schooling. The SAT is, generally speaking, a pretty good test of what it wants to measure (or at least it used to be — I’m not as familiar with it as I once was); test prep doesn’t affect scores that much at all.
My suspicion — and its just a suspicion — is that all the mad test prep that schools are doing doesn’t affect their scores that much, either, and that if they just mellowed out and got serious about a full, rich curriculum taught by people who know their subjects, test scores would go up far more than they do under a regime where what’s studied is the test, just the test, only the test, and naught but the test.
In other words, I’d bet that the tests are actually pretty good at measuring what they intend to measure (essay tests excepted — there is no way to mass grade good writing). Nevertheless, the approach of most schools seems to be premised on the notion that they aren’t good measures, and it’s affecting instruction. It may be as SuperSub says — that NCLB is responsible. But I was never a fan of that legislation to begin with.
And for that reason — not because the tests are evil but because they have deleterious effects on schools — I’m fully in favor of parents and students taking a stand against the testing regime. And whatever brave teachers and administrators who feel so inclined should join them.
Speak Your Mind Cancel replyName *Email *WebsitePlease leave these two fields as-is:Protected by Invisible Defender. Showed 403 to 54,376 bad guys.
The Book
Subscribe
(a) EdBlogsAnswer SheetBrainstormBridging DifferencesChange the EquationCharter InsightsCharterBlogClass StruggleCollege PuzzleCommon CoreCommunity College SpotlightConcord ReviewCore KnowledgeCritical MassCurriculum MattersDaily RiffDana GoldsteinDiscriminationsDropout NationEarly Ed WatchEarly StoriesEd BeatEd ReformerEdMoneyEdspressoEducated GuessEducation GadflyEducation InnovatingEducation NextEducation OptimistsEducation Policy BlogEduFlackEdutopia BlogEduwonkEdWizeEIA InterceptsFIRE’s TorchFlypaperGotham SchoolsGradebookHechingerEdHome EducationInside School ResearchJay P. GreeneKitchen Table MathLarry CubanMedia BullpenMinding the CampusNAS BlogNational JournalOut in Left FieldPolitics K-12Public School InsightsQuick and the EdredefinEdRick Hess Straight UpRock the SchoolhouseSchool Law and ReformShanker BlogSherman DornTeacher BeatThe Educated ReporterThis Week in EducationTurnaround ChallengeUniversity DiariesWhitney TilsonWhy Boys Fail(b) TeacherBlogsA Teacher’s EducationA Teacher’s ViewAssorted StuffBiology and BlueberriesCoach BrownCoach G's Teaching TipsCurmudgeonDaily GrindDeTocqueville's DaughterDy/DanExponential CurveGently Hew StoneHistory is ElementaryHuffEnglishLightly SeasonedMathNotationsMildly MelancholyMiss BraveNot All Flowers and SausagesNYC EducatorOrganized ChaosPractical TheoryRight on the Left CoastShrewdness of ApesSiobhan CuriousStories from SchoolTeach for America BlogsTeacher in a Strange LandTeacher VoicesTeacher, I Don't Get ItTeacherLingoTeaching NowThe LineWhat It's Like on the Inside(c) Blogroll11DAnn AlthouseBetsy’s PageBuzzMachineHit & RunI Speak of DreamsInkwellInstapunditIowahawkJames Lileks’ BleatJim MillerJust One MinuteKausfilesMegan McArdlePejman YousefzadehRoger SimonSamizdataScrapplefaceStuart BuckThe CornerThe PlankTim BlairVirginia PostrelVolokh ConspiracyWinds of Change(d) News/InfoBest of the WebCalifornia WatchCity JournalCommentary MagazinePajamas MediaReasonSlateTCS DailyThe OnionWeekly Standard(e) CollegesCalifornia business schoolLinksApidexinArtificial Christmas TreesAsbestos Lung CancerChicago CollegeChristmas DecorationsColleges in IllinoisColorado Nursing SchoolsEducatorFacebook EmoticonsMesotheliomaPhlebotomy TrainingScentOnline EducationAccredited Online CollegesBachelor Degrees OnlineBachelor of AccountingCNA Certification OnlineCollege OnlineDay TradingElementary & Secondary EducationEngineering Programs OntarioHealthcare Management DegreeMassage Therapy ProgramsMedical Billing and CodingMedical Billing and Coding TrainingOnline College EducationOnline Courses in AustraliaOnline Criminal Justice DegreesOnline MBAOnline Psychology DegreesOnline Trading EducationOnline UniversityPhlebotomy CertificationPhlebotomy TrainingReal Online Degrees BlogUMATX-Ray TechnicianSiteMeter
Return to top of page
Copyright © 2011 · Genesis Framework by StudioPress · WordPress · Log in
0 comments:
Post a Comment