The Purpose of Standardized Tests… What is it?

I watched a recent Q&A webcast Arne Duncan gave with Organizing for America.  Despite my criticism of where education reform is headed in our country, I am impressed by the many facets of education he needs to address as Secretary.  Due in part to this webcast, but mostly by conversations I’ve had recently with others who are not in the educational realm, I’ve realized that people really do expect answers and solutions from Duncan in terms of education reform.

I’ve made no secret of my opinions of standardized testing, particularly as it relates to teacher evaluations.  I am not arguing against standardized tests; I am questioning the use of standardized tests as a valid assessment of schools and teachers.

I feel that there are several questions that need to be addressed here:

1.  What kind of achievements do standardized tests measure?

2. What do standardized tests say about the teachers and schools?

3. How does the importance of one standardized test affect the teaching and learning in a school?

In the webcast, when questioned about the validity of standardized test scores, Duncan stated that he wanted to use these test scores to measure student growth, the “gains” students have achieved from year to year.  His example was that of a 6th grade student who had tested on a reading level three years  below standards. After a year with the 6th grade teacher, the student tested at only one year below standards.  Duncan said that under the old NCLB, the school and teacher would still be given a failing mark, whereas under the new NCLB, the teacher would be praised for the gains that the student had made.  This example was awesome.  Except that it doesn’t really prove that the student had made progress from one year to the next.  It just showed that the student tested better.

What kind of achievement are we assessing? When high school students begin to prepare for the SATs, many of them sign up for prep courses.  Why?  Because test scores can be improved with practice and familiarity with the structure of the test and the different types of questions asked.  What standardized tests measure, particularly in the elementary grades, is how well the students have learned to take the test.  I don’t discount the grades that students receive from these tests.  On some level, they do measure how well students can read and follow directions.  To a limited extent, I’m sure that they also measure some kind of content knowledge.  However, if the hope is to determine the growth that the student has made in one year, the standardized test is not an accurate tool. Most standardized tests are composed of multiple choice questions that, if lucky, students may correctly guess the answer.

Because the standardized tests do not give an accurate picture of any one student, it is difficult to use it as a key component of a school’s or teacher’s evaluation.  When the students’ test scores become the primary factor in school and administrative evaluations, the tide of education has shifted.  It is difficult for any administrator, whose job is so closely tied to the students’ performance on these tests, to not lose sight of the bigger picture which is student learning.  From my experience and through discussions with teachers in many schools,  there is a stronger emphasis on test prep and on student “growth” based on test scores.  Believe it or not, this behavior is contagious.  Parents begin to stress the importance of the standardized test,  focusing only on how their children will score on them.  I have even had parents dismiss the lack of work and progress their children have made during the school year because their children only need to pass the standardized tests to be promoted.  Student promotion from one grade to the next does not necessarily mean that the students have accomplished or learned much.  The promotion of test scores to rate schools have become so pervasive that it is the only thing people think of when they judge a school.  There needs to be other criteria to determine whether or not a school is succeeding.

The change in attitudes and mindsets of the school administration and parents trickles down to the classroom in the form of curriculum modifications.  In New York City public schools, test prep has been integrated into the curriculum.  In my school, we spend two consecutive months and many days from the beginning of the year on test prep.  This is in addition to the test prep academy that we have on Saturdays.  The inclusion of a testing unit was decided by the administration for the sole purpose of improving students’ test scores. As a teacher, these two months are tedious and unnecessary.  The time can be better used by teaching a unit on grammar or punctuation or literature or history or current events or climate change or animals of Africa, the list goes on.  Ultimately, I believe that the students lose out because there is so much stress on the outcome of the test and not on the learning itself.

I question the value of these tests not to take away from any teachers or schools whose students have scored well on the tests.  I have had my share of students who did tremendously well.  However, I do not look at those results as a reflection of my teaching.  The tests do not measure the work that we have done in my class, nor does it measure the level of critical thinking the students are able to do on their own.