In the movie, On The Waterfront the main character, Terry, played by Marlon Brando had a discussion with his brother, Charlie, played by Rod Steiger. The discussion explained how the big brother talked the younger brother to ignore his beliefs in himself and take a dive in a fight. In trusting his older brother’s advice the younger brother asked, “what do I get? a one way ticket to palookaville You was my brother Charlie, you should’ve looked out for me …”. It is with that image of a discussion in the back of a mob-owned Limo that I will now make this post.
Teachers need assessments. We need to assess what students know, in order to determine what it is we need to teach. We need to assess how effective our teaching is with our students, so that we can move forward, change direction, or go back for a better take. In assessing the learning of our students we can be creative. We can use Tests, Rubrics, Projects, or Portfolios developed in accordance with those who are being assessed, the students. Assessments are both needed and useful tools to an educator.
Now let us look at standardized tests. I cannot address any specific test in any state because these standardized tests are not standard from state to state. We were told at the outset of this test movement, that tests were needed to make sure our education system was maintaining the same level of teaching and learning throughout the country. It would be more accurate to say that was my understanding. So, now we have several different tests, developed separately by various groups across the country, testing whether kids are all at least at minimal levels of learning achievement and calling it standardized.
We should consider how the Test results are applied. We know how teachers use assessments, so let us list the uses of the standardized test results by individuals other than teachers. Administrators use the results for many things. There is funding tied to test results. There is programming tied to test results. There are purchasing decisions tied to test results. Staffing and scheduling are also tied to test results.
Additional applications of the test results would be for political influence. School Board members always pull them out at election time. Superintendents use them at most public meetings. I do not know for sure, but I would imagine, that the test result numbers might be bandied about in contract negotiations with teacher unions. My favorite observation of all would be the use of these results in Real Estate offices. I imagine that some real estate agents have laminated sheets of good test results for districts in which they are trying to sell houses. If the houses are in districts with poor test results the subject will never be brought up.
Now there is talk of tying a teacher’s pay or even the teacher’s continuance in the career to be dependent on these test results. How can that be justified to teachers that have students who must take the test after only being with that teacher a short time. Maybe we could go back in the students academic history and also hold previous teachers responsible. It should be noted at this point that there are some subject areas that are not governed by standardized testing. Language courses, Elective courses, Physical Education courses, Tech and Business courses are among those not requiring standardized tests. How will these teachers be affected by the reliance on tests? Is there a different standard for English, social studies, math and science teachers?
My thoughts now go to when is it that we are doing this testing. Formative testing is an as-you-go assessment. It allows the teacher to reflect and adjust. The Summative assessment is the culminating assessment. How successful was the teacher with the Big picture. In this respect standardized tests are best compared to an Autopsy. I would propose that we need more ongoing healthcare.
I try to teach my Methods students that if they do their job as they are trained and teach kids to be learners, that those kids will do well on any standardized test. They should never teach to the test. Their veteran colleagues however, often tell them the opposite. They tell them that the test is everything. We are judged by the test results of our students. To underscore and emphasize that statement, teaching for the test is not discouraged by administrators.
My quandary: What do I tell my students? Higher order thinking skills are paramount. Follow Bloom and teach through creativity, and assess creatively. Pay no attention to standardized tests, for if your students are learning it will show as success on the test. Am I being Charlie as my students are Terry. With the advice that I give them, will they ask…“what do I get? a one way ticket to palookaville You was my brother Charlie, you should’ve looked out for me …”.
I have no answers, or suggestions for change on this subject because I need more information. Therefore, I believe it is time to assess the assessment. We need to clearly understand our objective and use the assessment to determine if we are accomplishing it.We may need to find other ways to make political statements about education and other ways to sell real estate. Let’s use assessment to determine learning.
My Island View 
A thought provoking piece and certainly true of England where standardized tests have been the Summative yardstick by which children are measured. This being so has, in my opinion, become a rod for a lot of teacher’s backs. I joined the profession to teach children and enjoy educating, enlightening and enthuasing. More recently it seems that some schools stopped teaching children and started teaching targets and tests. There is probably a middle ground and a place for standardization in ensuring that children are accessing the information they need to progress to the ‘higher order thinking skills’ that will make them an asset in future years. But I am at a quandary to where this middle ground sits. All the time national test results are given the coverage and publicity that seems to be the norm, they will remain important to authoriites, governors, school boards, sponsors and parents. This being the case there is every possibility that they remain a stick with which to beat educators.
As my mother used to say, “Everything in moderation.” It would be disingenuous to tell student teachers or novice teachers as they go into the classroom (I am assuming that is who you were referencing) that testing is not important and will take care of itself if you are creative, use bloom’s to guide instruction and teach kids to be learners. It isn’t either/or. Like it or not we are all judged by standardized tests so we can’t ignore them. That said, it seems to make sense to take an inquiry/concept/tech infused approach to learning because we know that’s how kids learn best, and we still have to prepare them for “the test”–in moderation.
I am fortunate to be in a district that tests in the Fall. This is good news because it is not about the teacher and as a school community we can use these as a formative assessment that helps us plan for the year. It helps us see those students who make need extra support band those who may need more of challenge. But as you said there are many areas not tested.
In addition, yes the test scores do drive a lot of administrative things. Some of this is good, some neutral, and some frustrating.
I agree with the other two comments that a middle ground is important. Standardized testing should only be one part of the data we examine with regard to student learning. Among the myriad of reasons this is important is the simple fact that the tests often do not reflect what is important , are not always aligned with our standards and lack any connection with the skill set we are striving to teach today.
All that said , teachers do have to teach test talking skills and how to work in a timed environment. These are life skills. We have also been discussing in my school district the idea that if we get better at collecting data on student learning we will have something to add to the conversation which will mitigate the emphasis on standardized tests.
As a teacher, I do not teach to the test. The skills that I teach happen to be skills that are on the test, but they need to learn those skills.
Admins encourage teachers to teach to the test because it currently impacts them more than teachers. They feel the direct pressure when test scores go down and they pass that on to their teachers. I think it’s ok to tell your students to focus on the delivery of content and not a specific test. No matter what the test looks like, the kids will be ready if taught the skills.
Most of us have some experience of looking at a child’s test scores and saying either “I already knew that” or “That’s not an accurate reflection of his abilities.” If we are engaging with the children, we rarely need a test to tell us whether the child is “getting” the material at hand.
If we are not engaging with the children, we aren’t really teaching anyway.
In Oregon, we were told that the “high stakes tests” would only be given in 3rd, 5th, 8th, and 10th grades. This was to prevent teachers from constantly teaching to the test, and I know some teachers chose to teach other grades to avoid this pressure. Unfortunately, more tests have been added to make sure that everyone is making progress and has a chance to “try out” the tests. Are the stakes lower for these tests? Nope. Kids and teachers are under the gun to get high scores, with some kids not allowed to do anything else until they get acceptable scores.
As a homeschooler accustomed to testing with timely, useful results, I was suprised to find that the standardized tests my kids took in the public schools took an entire year before I could get their scores. In fact, one of my sons apparently “passed” a test he never took. As a tool for finding out what individual students know, it is completely useless.
Nothing could be more valuable as a life skill than being taught how to think. My favourite book on this topic is “Hooray for Diffendoofer Day”, a late Seuss title, and one every teacher should own.
Given the political climate inwhich your teachers will be working, it might be practical to help them help their students perform well on those standardized tests. This, with the understanding that the real value lies in the assessment for learning, the process portfolios that they guide their students to create. It will do them no practical good to do their job so well that they are let go because their students fail the standardized tests, irregardless of our opinion of their true value.
An excellent post, Tom. Thoughtful as always. I’ll be sending my grad students here to hopefully add their perspective.
Yours,
@tomfullerton
(Who is so glad to be living and teaching in Canada)
I’d like to describe an experience I had in England. I’m a teacher in my home country but I applied for a post as a Spanish assistant in England a couple of years ago.
I remember two months before I came back to South America, the head teacher had a meeting with the language assistants and said:’Thank you very much for whatever you’ve been doing with our pupils but the exams (GCSE/A levels) will be soon, so we want you to focus on that. Only use the past papers, help them with their speeches because they need to pass, we don’t want to upset parents’.
I found this quite hard because of 3 reasons:
1. The lessons were given in English so the pupils didn’t care about understanding the target language, after all, they were given words/phrases lists they had to repeat only.
2. The test asked pupils to communicate in real situations and discuss currents news but for obvious reasons ver few could hardly speak spontaneously.
3. Language assistants just had a couple of hours to help the pupils with their oral skills. Most of the time, it was me (the Spanish assistant) speaking to pairs in a room while the teacher was giving a different lesson in another one.
At the end of the term, one or two students failed and the others passed with a low mark. Most pupils who passed had learnt a speech by heart and did not have a clear idea of what they were actually saying.
After this experience, I could just think about the prestige schools want to get by making their pupils pass standardised tests, and at what extent students really benefit from them. What is the point in passing exams/tests which do not give a real result?
[…] Assess the Assessment by Tom Whitby at My Island View […]
Great article and interesting thoughts.
2 quick comments- Your initial statement is dead-on, but I think actually controversial.
“Teachers need assessments. We need to assess what students know, in order to determine what it is we need to teach.”
I have noticed a large number of teachers who hate assessments- for that very reason. No one likes to fail and assessments sometimes expose our failures. They should be seen as blessings, but unfortunately they are usually not seen that way.
The second point is about “higher order thinking skills”. Those skills emerge after mastery of fundamentals. It is the transmission of those fundamentals that needs to be assessed. Students can not just be exposed to fundamentals, they need tons and tons of repetition. Fundamentals need to be ingrained so deeply that they become second nature to students.
Once we can properly teach fundamentals and we can properly assess that we are in fact doing so, our students will be equipped to accomplish amazing things.
I have long been against standardised testing. I find it is difficult to judge students’ knowledge, as you say, at the end of only 18 weeks with me when many students come to me (maths) without a proper base. Most of our subjects on the secondary level require a base knowledge on to which we build.
I agree, fundamentally, with most of the comments here. I find myself, however, most in line with that of Nicholas. I always mention to student how important others will find the results of these tests (on the first day only), but teach my content and my standards in whatever way best suits the students. I typically find that my students have been successful on these tests, not because I have taught to the tests, but because I have taught them holistically the content and set high standards and expectations.
The test results will come if they have the knowledge. Knowledge is the key…not the test.
(*Note: I do, however, incorporate 2-3 days for review and standardised test-taking strategies into my pacing guide each semester. Giving the students the knowledge AND the strategies to succeed at these tests doesn’t do anyone harm.)
You are right… so right, to tell your students to teach synthesis and analysis. If a student can think, really think critically, they can think their way through any test.
I often stand alone in suggesting that standardized tests can be very useful tools if their consequences are leveled at the correct group. If the test fairly assesses student achievement, then the student should reap the reward.
Could you imagine if my university’s accreditation was based on my success on the GRE. Or if my parents had to wager their license on my ability to pass the driver’s exam. This simply does not make sense.
As it stands, teachers identify a standard, teach the standard, provide learning opportunities, and assess the student’s ability. If the student achieves, the teacher is congratulated. If the student does not meet the standard, the teacher or admin or district is reprimanded. Either way the student passes to the next grade or class. It takes only a few seconds for any student to see that there is no direct consequence related to their achievement. All of the rewards for their activity are visited on other individuals. Who would work so that others may reap the benefit.
When we end social passing, and begin to reward students for their learning, and not for their birthdays we will begin to see learning take place.
I am one of the lucky ones so to speak. As an art teacher, I do not often have pressure exerted for students to score better. What I have instead, are rooms full of students who have rarely ever been asked to think, really think.
As a fellow teacher-educator, Tom, I share your difficulty. I spend some time looking at our state standards and our state reading tests (for example) to help students look for the overlap between their own core values for English and what gets tested on the PSSA. Our standards are so vague that it’s easy to find overlap. The PSSA is a bit harder, but it’s possible to do. We talk about a 2-3 day prep for the “HOW” of the PSSA. . . but that’s it.
Now, what I’m pretty nervous about are the Common Core standards that are coming and what they will mean to the fairly innocuous PSSA. PA was gearing up to create its own “Graduation Competency Assessments” in core subjects (complete with “voluntary” curricula”), but they have put this effort into abeyance with the onset of the Common Core.
They make me VERY nervous.
Tom,
This is such an interesting post and I love that it help launch the #onecom chat! It was such a great topic that provoked our thinking about teaching to the test and teaching students to be life long learners. There are many ways around teaching to the test, however, district mandates can get in the way and strip teacher autonomy. This is my fear for current teachers and I especially fear for new teachers. We need to have politicians in place that strip down these parameters and allow our students to compete and learn to be global citizens. With our current tests in place, this goal, will always fall short.
Thanks again, and keep the great posts coming!