The next 3 posts will address the debate over standardized testing.  This week simply opens the issue with general comments.  Next week’s post will deal with statistics and anecdotes.  The final post will illustrate alternative assessments & varied means of implementing these tests.

Is this Pass or Fail?
Is this Pass or Fail?
Each year, NYS teachers are evaluated for their effectiveness.  60% of this evaluation comes from multiple classroom observations, performed by multiple administrators in the teacher’s school.  40% of each teacher’s score comes from a mix of standardized exams taken once a year by their students. This year, I was evaluated on my teaching methods and lesson preparation (60%) of my score.  I received an average score of “Highly Effective”, which means I am within the top 30% of teachers in terms of classroom instruction.
While many people decry the use of observations at all, I have found them to be useful in improving my skills as teacher.  I began my first year with completely Ineffective observations.  My tough administrator observed, however, that I had a great rapport with even the most hardened students in my class.  She told me to begin with my interpersonal relationships, and that my content and skill instruction will begin over time.  Clearly, this advice worked.
Moreover, observations work when the observer is knowledgeable about content, instructional skills, and the students that are being taught.  The idea is for the expert observer to provide feedback to the teacher, with suggestions on how to implement the feedback in specific ways.  Observations should never be an “aha!  Got cha! You’re FIRED!” type of situation.  From their first day to their last, a dedicated teacher will strive to get better at their job.
While typically I made no negative allowance for them, the students I teach are English Language Learners and Students With Disabilities.  I teach them the same rigorous content that I teach any other student, I just need to be more cognizant of their learning profiles.  Babying or making excuses for a student based upon disability or culture is called “soft bigotry” and does no one any favors.  While it will require additional posts to quantify a “learning profile,” it simply means that each student learns differently.  For more information immediately, consider Robert Gardner’s concepts of Multiple Intelligences:
We all process information in different ways.
We all process information in different ways.
Having said that, the reality is that my students traditionally perform abysmally on standardized exams.  Problematically (perhaps selfishly) the remaining 40% of my evaluation score is how students fare on standardized final exams.  This group of students does not do well on 3+ hour back-to-back exams that summarize their entire year of learning on how they are performing on one particular day.  They receive a pittance of “accommodations” on exams, that are not specialized to their individual learning profiles.  In order to be “highly effective”, I have to demonstrate my knowledge of each students’ individual learning profile and utilize this knowledge in my instruction.  Why then, is this not the case in exams?
The purpose of assessments (aka tests) is to inform the teacher about specific content  that needs to be taught again, and what the students retained.  Specific content refers to examples such as: the surface area of polynomials; the causes of World War 2; an author’s intentions in an argumentative essay; the processes involved with Photosynthesis.  If schools want a holistic requirement that resembles how teachers are evaluated, students should have to submit a portfolio with speaking, reading, research and writing components.  This method of evaluation is used in high-level academics, as well as actual jobs in career fields.   This type of work takes time, planning, and consultation.  Moreover, it allows all students a chance to perform work relevant to their interests, as well as explore content outside of the mandated curricula of public schooling.
Students – especially those requiring additional academic modifications – are simply not accurately evaluated over a 3+ hour battery exam.  My students contend with both the normal level of anxiety when taking said exams, but also, has to deal with additional cognitive efforts that correlate to being a language learner or having a disability. Those students whose learning profiles are keyed into taking tests will do well.  Those students who may have talents elsewhere are simply deemed less effective a student than others.
In New York, it doesn’t matter how talented you are in music, art, vocational skills, etc.  If you can’t pass a single exam on that particular day, you fail the course.  In other words, a lengthy exam manipulates courses that should be exploratory and skill-developing into test prep classes that are dissuaded from focusing on content outside of what is weighed most heavily on exams.  Students may be able to regurgitate the definitions of Communism and Capitalism, but they are not afforded an opportunity to evaluate the success of these economic systems in influencing world history.
Outside of the financial benefits to teachers being considered “highly effective,” (something which itself is controversial) we are robbing our students of the enriching experiences that they have in exploring rich academic content.  Our students are being told that unless a content, skill, or particular perspective will get them points on an exam, that aspect is a waste of their time.
Logically, how foolish is it to expect a student to be graded solely on three hours, when their academic career spans over a decade?  Even our most elite athletes lose games.  Michael Jordan has six championship rings, but even he lost important games.  There may be chart-topping musicians, beloved by everyone.  But, even they have made bad songs.  Elvis Presley is one of the most successful musicians in history, but he has songs people hate (or worse, were stolen from others in the name of “success”) We may have immensely successful investors worth billions, but even they have made bad investments.  Why, then, should we expect the evaluation of students or teachers to rely so heavily on information that is meant to encourage further instruction, rather than an end-all, be-all conclusion?
It's now or never.
It’s now or never.

Author: Doctor Sugar

Disabled. Hyperactive. Disorganized. Anti-Authoritarian. Highly Effective*. I am an instructor of English as a New Language (ENL/TESOL) to exceptional learners ("Special Education") at American High School in Bronx, New York. My joy is guiding teenagers towards literacy and productive lives. In my spare time, I rhyme, study the martial sciences, cook for my wife, and play with my daughter. This blog is informed by my own experiences as: 1) An adult with multiple learning disabilities. 2) A doctoral student (ongoing). 3) A former lobbyist for higher education and public school reform. 4) A Teacher's Union Organizer in multiple states. 5) An educational sales rep for corporate America. 6) A private tutor, both for the privileged and undeserved alike. The purpose of this blog is threefold: 1. To model my experiences for the students and educators that I mentor. 2. To document my personal experiences as I grow as an educator, while commenting on education, labor, and society. 3. To provide public accountability so that I reach my personal goals. 4. To mock, satirize, jive, jeer, jest, jeckle, heckle, hoodwink, bamboozle and flim-flam banal aspects of academic life.** Thank you for taking the time to read my blog. Peace. Love. Respect. Jacob Sugar *According to the Danielson Rubric For Teaching, I am rated as a "Highly Effective" teacher on the basis of classroom instructional observations. Combined with the standardized test scores of my students, I am just barely rated as "Highly Effective." According to the NYS battery of teacher examinations, I am in the 96th percentile in every subject area. My GRE scores place me in the bottom 25th percentile for Verbal Reasoning AND Mathematical Reasoning. My credit score is in the Good range, with a poor debt-to-income ratio (you read that part about the Master's Degree and Ph.D, yes?). **Did you see what I did there?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s