New Jersey high school teacher Dan
Ferat reflects on how many tests he is now required to give to his students, as
compared to ten years ago.
So, in only ten years, we have gone
from students taking five exams per year (six for juniors with the HSPA) to 34
exams per year (30 for seniors) with many more in sight because there will be a
PARCC for EVERY SUBJECT supposedly because there are CCCS for every subject
except electives (plus those PSAT/SAT/ACT tests which I’m not even counting).
Forget the amount of time teachers
will have to spend grading all these exams and writing them and adjusting them
over the years. Honestly, that’s beside the point when it comes to education.
It’s true we don’t get enough time “on the clock” as it is, but the real issue
is the students. See, I always thought education was about LEARNING a subject
in a classroom from readings, teachers, and experiences (like labs). But with
all this testing, there will be less learning and more studying for tests. We
teachers are evaluated on how well our students do on all the tests, so of
course we’re going to teach to them. One would be a complete moron not to since
one can wind up fired if one gets too low scores in two years. This will narrow
curricula, which means less information and fewer skills learned. It will
standardize curricula more, which means fewer choices for students and less of
a need for EXPERIENCED TEACHERS, who share so much of their insight and
experiences with students to bring their subjects to life. But if everything is
just straight out of a book, like a script, all you need is a warm body to
watch the kids and lead them through the standardized curriculum.
If parents understood this, they
would not be happy. They would begin to recognize what the legislators and the
federal government are doing to undermine genuine education and to dampen
students’ ardor for learning as well as to demoralize teachers.
Professor Buxton,
ReplyDeleteAlthough you do bring up some great points about testing in high schools, I do not agree with your opinions about frequent testing. While one can argue that testing students often is a hindrance to teachers, and that school becomes more about studying for tests rather than learning; it is important to note that without frequent testing, teachers and administrators would be completely unaware about the performance of their students individually, and also about their school as a whole. As you stated, if students are constantly getting low scores on tests and failing classes, teachers can be reprimanded and/or fired. With more testing, students who receive poor scores on the first tests will be granted chances to bring their grades back up instead of having a small amount of large cumulative exams. Performance of students is also very important because the main goal of a secondary education institution is to prepare their students for the future ahead of them, which requires quite a bit of standardization. Colleges and universities look for certain guidelines to be met in order to agree that a student would be able to succeed at a college level. Therefore, ample testing is necessary to prove to the colleges that these students are up for the challenge.
AJ
We spend a large portion of our developing years in a classroom that should be teaching us a lot more than the correct way to fill in Scantron sheets. Ever since standardized testing became the new way to torture teachers and students, larger and harder standards have been put into place. The expectations of students to produce competing scores in different subjects, creates a lot of pressure not just on the students but on the teachers, who are more times blamed for the lackluster results rather than given credit for improvements.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand I do think that standardized tests, no matter how dreadful they are to take, are necessary to determine the status of teachers and students. But what I don’t agree with is how the test scores are analyzed. I don’t believe the diversity of learning and teaching styles are considered enough when looking at scores. It is clear that there are many different learning styles, even within one classroom. A child’s intelligence and worth in this world could never be told by a single test but sadly it sometimes feels like it is.
SP
SP,
DeleteI agree with your statement that standardized tests are necessary in determining the status of teachers and students, but, I don’t think it is necessary to have multiple different testing dates, or to have these tests take longer than a class day to complete. I think this because these standardized tests are taking too much time out of the school curriculum and cutting into the time that teachers devote to help students learn the material needed to understand the class as a whole. By having different testing dates, it is almost making it seem as though teachers are only supposed to be teaching what the test will cover and nothing of importance. Students are basically being taught how to take a specific test, which will never help them in their future endeavors. Although standardized tests help teachers learn what topics students need more help on, frequently it has been shown that some students are not good test takers. In this case, it is almost unfair to have tests seem to determine a child's “intelligence and worth” like it is in todays society.
AJ
As much as it would stink to have to correct more exams during the year I do think having the students take more tests would be helpful. The tests really do show how a student is doing throughout the subject. If a student has a hard time on one of the tests, they know to work on that portion more for the final test. It also gives them more of a chance to bring up their grade because one section that they did not get should not define their knowledge on the subject as a whole. Also, some students are not good test takers. If a student is not a good test taker then having more tests can allow that student to really focus on smaller sections which could help them test better. Having more tests also allows teachers to see what sections they should focus more on in the future easier because even if the tests grades are not considered low but lower than what is usual for you, as a teacher, then you know that in that section you may explain things in a way that is hard for the students to understand.
ReplyDeleteAN
The purpose of a test is to see how well the educational process is working. The purpose of education is not to see how well our students can score on tests. The idea is that tests should be made to see if students truly understand and are retaining the information being taught in the classroom. With all of these tests being required now, teachers are forced to dedicate copious amounts of time to teaching students what will be on tests as determined by the government. The fact that teachers jobs are at risk over the results of said tests makes teachers want their students to do as well as possible, leading to even more time spent drilling the same information into students’ heads and making them take practice tests, and less time actually learning. SP, you say that standardized tests “are necessary to determine the status of teachers and students.” I think that this is true, but only if we wish to determine the status of our students as test takers, and the status of our teachers as test tutors. The fact of the matter is that actually teaching and learning are different from preparing students for tests and taking those tests.
ReplyDeleteAJ, you bring up the optimistic point that “students who receive poor scores on the first tests will be granted chances to bring their grades back up instead of having a small amount of large cumulative exams.” I have to say that I mostly agree with you. This is definitely an upside to more tests. I have been in a position where I have not done well on one – or even several – quizzes or tests and was able to salvage my grade in the class due to more opportunities to get higher scores on other tests. But consider those students who are not good test takers. For them, more tests just amount to more stress and just dig their graves deeper and deeper with every exam. AN points out that “if a student is not a good test taker then having more tests can allow that student to really focus on smaller sections which could help them test better.” Again, I agree with you. Kind of. There are definitely students out there who don’t love tests or aren’t blessed with the innate ability to be good test takers but can learn to test better. But there are some who simply cannot learn. There are some who will never be good at testing no matter how much they practice. It’s like whistling. Some people will never learn how to whistle. For those of us who can whistle, it’s easy to say, “just put your lips like this and blow air through. It’s easy.” But maybe it isn’t easy. Maybe it’s downright impossible for some people. And maybe some people just don’t want to learn. Because whistling, like learning how to take tests, while being kind of a neat skill to possess, is ultimately a pointless skill in the real world.
Ben, I fully agree some with the points you are making, especially that “actually teaching and learning are different from preparing students for tests and taking those tests.” You raise a good point when you mention my previous comment and counter my statement with that tests are designed to see if a student has learned and retained the knowledge taught and should not be to analyze test taking skills (I am not a good test taker myself). This I think best aligns with the educational system before PPARC. Before PPARC, when states designed standardized tests, school curriculum did not solely revolve around the state tests (at least my school did not). My teachers only prepared for the tests maybe a week prior as a review of how we should expect to see it setup because the content was built into the curriculum in a way that still allowed us to learn and understand the information. The NECAP for many of us was not something to stress about because it was familiar. Teachers had already taught us the concepts during class and had given their own comprehension tests but never setup like a standardized test. The PPARC exam is a lot more demanding as to having to prepare kids on how to take it. I think that since the PPARC exam is computerized it takes more time to familiarize students with it, but I would much rather take a more traditional written exam.
DeleteMy main opposition to certain new national standards is that students are not ready for such a drastic change in teaching. I do not agree with the demands of the PPARC exam. I believe that a state or a group of states should be able to design their own types of exams, however, I do think that if the country wants to see more similar results from coast to coast, then keep with the Common Core for the basic level of content covered but lose the PPARC exam as the way to measure how well the information is retained.
Yes Ben, I do agree with you that some students will never learn how to take tests. For the students who cannot learn how to take test can narrow down what they need to learn so they do not have to think in large sections which can be a big help for them. The more tests they administer the more chances they have to show what parts they do know. I personally liked teachers who gave out more tests. I was not the best at taking tests but knowing that, that teacher was going to give out a lot more tests I felt more comfortable taking the tests because I knew I had other chances to bring my grade up and not have to dwell on the fact that I would not be able to show that I do know what I am learning. I know I am not a student that never learned how to take tests but I completely understand when students say they have a hard time taking tests.
DeleteI do believe that students are spending more time studying for tests than they are actually learning the material. It is like students are only memorizing the material for the test and once the test is over they immediately forget the information. AN has a good point saying, “having the students take more tests would be helpful.” Yes taking a lot of test will give students the practice they need for exams in college but I think we need to look at exactly how many tests, what types of tests and what material they are on in order to determine if they are worth it. While tests do take away a lot of time that could be spent learning more material, I have to agree with AJ and Ben when they say that, “students who receive poor grades on the first tests will be granted chances to bring their grades back up.” This is true because every student has an off day and doesn’t do as well as they could on a test. So having multiple chances to prove your capabilities is beneficial to students grade wise. SP has a good point when you say, “the expectations of students to produce competing scores… creates a lot of pressure not just on the students but on the teachers, who are more times blamed for the lackluster results.” I do agree that teachers are blamed more than the students which is unfair because there will always be those students who simply do not care. It is a shame but they will never do well on the exams because they don’t care. Teachers should not be blamed for students like that who get bad scores.
ReplyDeleteI am glad to hear that we are mostly in agreement, ER! Although I have to say that I am kind of qualifying the argument that additional testing gives students the opportunity to bring their grades back up. While some students may just have an off day and do poorly on one or two tests, some students are simply not good test takers, and each additional exam is nothing but another nail in their coffin. It is not fair to inundate our students with tests when some kids do better on different ways of showing their knowledge, like in a presentation. Either way, I guess that I am just further agreeing with your assertion that teachers should not be blamed for students' bad scores. Not only are there those kids out there who will do poorly because they don't care (as you mentioned) but there are kids who will continue to do poorly because they get overwhelmed and shut down during test taking time. It's not that they don't know the material or don't care, but they just don't know how to test well. It's just another reason why copious testing is unfair to students, and why assessing educators based on students' scores is unfair to teachers.
DeleteI believe that frequent test taking is beneficial for the student if performed correctly. I believe this for a variety of reasons including the one stated by AJ that frequent tests allow students who may not have scored as well the opportunity to do better. However, I believe that testing is the ultimate way of testing a student's comprehension of material. If students have little amounts of exams or tests that means each will be covering a lot of material and worth a large portion of the student's grade. This makes it extremely challenging for the students to understand all the material and still be able to do well. I believe the most efficient way of test taking is a large amount of tests that cover a small amount of material. This allows the students to focus on and comprehend small amounts of material and do well on exams. Teachers will be able to correct the exams quicker and be able to hand back the test quicker as well. Students who do not do well on one exam will have multiple chances to increase their grade. This will further the comprehension of what the students are learning and their understanding. From my personal experience when taking exams, I am so focused on knowing what I need to know for the test that I focus on the general information rather than actually comprehending it. I believe it can be impossible at times to fully comprehend everything you learn if the tests that you need to study for are very long and cover a lot of information. Shorter tests will benefit the student with long-term comprehension, allow them to score well, and increase their grade will consistent great scoring.
ReplyDeleteRS,
ReplyDeleteWhen reading these posts, it is very interesting to see all the different opinions we have on such general matters that we as students see almost everyday in our academic lives. Your post was a great read, and it showed in depth, your thoughts about test taking. I really like how within your response you added examples that relate to you as a student. For example, you said how in a larger test sometimes you wouldn't really grasp the information, but just know it more on general terms. I think this is a really important concept when taking tests. Tests that cover huge amounts of class material can be extremely challenging for students since it is a lot harder to understand and comprehend the subject matter. When lots of information is on the test it could also lead to test stress, which could make a student do poorly on it. Overall, I agree with your statement that shorter tests will benefit the student more grade wise in the long run because the student will be able to actually understand and learn the material that is on it.
AJ
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteMany of the points made throughout the post were very understandable, however I believe that frequent testing can be very beneficial to students and teachers in a school district. Many often think that standardized testing will narrow the curriculum, I think it is more so focusing on the basic skills that students need to master. The greater mastery of these skills, the higher performance students will achieve. I think that frequent and standardized testing are the best ways of monitoring student and teachers performance. The more tests given to students, the greater chance at higher achievement they might have as opposed to only a few tests. If a student doesn’t do as well on some tests, they have a chance to do better on the rest therefore making up for the bad scores. This is also a good way for the teacher to monitor where the student needs more assistance and understanding on the material taught. The stricter standards and increased testing that are given to the students are better preparing them for college and that is a very important tool for the success of their future.
ReplyDelete