Testing: How
Much Is Too Much? NOVEMBER 17, 2014
8:03 AM ET
by ANYA
KAMENETZ NPR Ed
"In
some places, tests — and preparation for them — are dominating the calendar and
culture of schools and causing undue stress for students and educators."
The quote
comes not from an angry parent or firebrand school leader but from Education
Secretary Arne Duncan. Of course, he's the guy currently in charge of a big
chunk of those tests: the No Child Left Behind requirement of annual
standardized testing in grades 3-8, plus once during grades 10-12.
And those
tests are just the start. Lately everyone from the president on down has been
weighing in on the question: Are kids really being tested too much? And their
answer, mostly, is a big "Yes."
President
Obama said last month that he "welcomes" a pledge from state and
big-city school leaders to work together to "cut back on unnecessary
testing and test preparation."
The groups,
the Council of Chief State School Officers and the Council of the Great City
Schools, announced the initial results of an attempt to quantify the current
state of testing in America.
Their survey
of large districts showed students taking an average of 113 standardized tests
between pre-K and grade 12, with 11th grade the most tested.
Another
recent study by the Center for American Progress looked at 14 school districts.
It found that students in grades 3-8 take an average of 10, up to a high of 20,
standardized assessments per year. That doesn't count tests required of smaller
groups of students, like English-language learners.
What may be
a little trickier is defining just which tests qualify as
"unnecessary." The CCSSO survey describes testing requirements that
have seemingly multiplied on their own without human intervention, like hangers
piling up in a closet.
They found
at least 23 distinct purposes for tests, including: state and federal
accountability, grade promotions, English proficiency, program evaluation,
teacher evaluation, diagnostics, end-of-year predictions, or to fulfill the
requirements of specific grants.
They also
found a lot of overlap, with some of these tests collecting nearly the same
information.
Resources
'Sucked Up'
Kathleen
Jasper left her post as an assistant principal of a Florida high school in
early 2014 because, she says, of her mounting frustrations with testing.
"I was being forced to implement bad education policy, especially with
respect to testing," she said.
Florida is
one of at least 36 states, by NPR Ed's count, that require or plan to require
high school end-of-course exams in an array of subjects, as a condition of
graduation.
If you want
a high school diploma in the Sunshine State, you must pass tests in algebra,
geometry, civics and U.S. history. That's on top of the state standardized tests
(the FCAT) in math and reading, and every other test on the list.
These
end-of-course tests are given throughout 10th, 11th and 12th grade, and each
year there is time set aside for retakes. Schools, naturally, want to give
students as many chances as possible to pass the tests, because the students
need them to graduate.
The result?
"I watched tests take up 40 to 50 percent of the year," says Jasper,
who now maintains a blog and podcast about education. "Media centers were
closed for the entire month of January. Laptops, every resource was sucked up
into testing."
Debbie Brockett
reports the same scenario unfolding on the other side of the country. She is
the principal of Las Vegas High School, a 3,000-student, predominantly Hispanic
and low-income school.
Nevada is
another state that requires end-of-course exams, two each in reading and math.
"Thirty-seven
percent of the month of October was taken up with testing," Brockett said.
"And the same is true in March. January is another heavy testing month.
But the test prep may kill us even more." She estimates one day entirely
devoted to prep for every day of testing.
The average
pass rate for an end-of-course exam at Brockett's school is 33 percent. That
means most students have at least one retake, which are given several times a
year. They may retake as many times as needed to pass, even as the material
covered on the test fades farther and farther behind them.
"The
kids who retake are the ones who need more instruction, but the more they
retake, the less instructional time they get."
- Debbie
Brockett, high school principal
"The
kids who retake are the ones who need more instruction, but the more they
retake, the less instructional time they get," she said.
These tests
are not graded quickly. In some cases, a student who fails a test may have just
a few days before the next retake — not enough time to work on what he or she
got wrong.
Both
Brockett and Jasper said test days disrupt an entire school. Even students who
aren't sitting for a specific test may find themselves moved all over the
building, or they may end up marking time watching movies for several days.
Signs Of
Change
There may be
a glimmer of change on the horizon. Individual districts, such as Palm Beach
County in Florida, are voting to simplify testing requirements. And states
including Rhode Island have adopted moratoriums on high-stakes, end-of-course
exams.
The Center
for American Progress report suggests that the shift to Common Core
assessments, which are designed to be better aligned with instruction, could
help eliminate duplication. Brockett is optimistic about that idea too.
"If we
do this right, good instruction should lead to higher test scores, where every
day that you teach, you're preparing," she said. "I can put that 30
to 40 percent [of time spent on prep] back into sound instruction."
But in the
meantime, she says, testing is defining the school experience for thousands of
students, and not in a positive way:
"Two
weeks ago I talked to a kid who had just walked out of exams. He was very
frustrated. He had tears in his eyes. He has Bs and Cs in chemistry, but he
can't pass the science exam. If he doesn't pass, he doesn't graduate."
While the emphasis on testing in schools is a lot, it can be very beneficial if it is used properly. Testing is a great resource to make sure students are getting the information that is necessary to earn a grade, and retain the information. It is true that if a student is retaking a test the time the material was presented to them is further in the past, but that will help ensure that students are still reviewing the material. Repetition is something that is extremely beneficial when trying to make sure something is remembered. Testing is also very helpful when telling us what areas of a subject need to be reviewed or gone over more in depth. If a large portion of a class fails one area of a test, you know that the teacher did not do as well as they thought they did when teaching the subject and this will allow them to make sure they go into more detail in the future. While it is true that some students are not very good test takers, by having them go through tests every year it helps them develop skills that can help them do better on the tests. By requiring students to be exposed to tests from a young age, it can also help them become more comfortable in high stakes situations and will allow them to be more level headed while taking tests like the SAT or ACT. While there are some negatives that come to testing so often, the positives make testing more beneficial, if we use the data we receive from the tests to our advantage.
ReplyDeleteWhat the government and administrators fail to realize is that these tests that they make mandatory are a huge toll on the student and do not benefit the student the way they think it will. Testing students is a quick and easy way to show progress in a school, but it comes at a big expense. The tests that these students take are very taxing on them, and most of the time, it proves how much people do not know. It is a huge waste of time in my opinion, it is not worth the amount of time wasted, it is not worth the mental toll it takes on the students, and it is not worth the backlash on the teachers either. What people fail to do after they receive the test scores is to go back and actually start making changes. If we started taking the tests more seriously, and we actually started using them to benefit us then students would not mind as much, but until that happens I am a firm believer that testing is a waste of time.
ReplyDeleteWhile I do not fully agree with you on your idea that testing is a complete waste of time, I do think it is overdone and should be cut back. I think that some proficiency tests should be given just to make sure that students are learning, but in my opinion, if you really want to compare students across the country they should all be given the same test. Realistically, there is no correct way in which one can compare MCAS scores to FCAT scores. I think it is ridiculous that states like Florida and Nevada require all of those extra tests because I agree with you in that this test taking is very taxing on the students, as seen by the last little paragraph about the student who could not pass his science test in the original post. One thing I personally hate about standardized tests is they do not give you a way to go back and look at your test and see where you went wrong once the answers are released. I am a firm believer in the idea that one of the best ways to learn is from your mistakes and like you said, nobody goes back after the test scores are given out and makes an effort to find areas within certain schools and classrooms that need improvement.
DeleteAs a student who has recently graduated from an American public school, I can say with 100% certainty that American students are tested far too much. I have lost count of just how many standardized tests I have taken over my twelve years in school. I have been made to sit through NECAP, STARR, SAT, ACT, etc. MC makes a valid point when they say, "Testing students is a quick and easy way to show progress in a school, but it comes at a big expense." It is true that standardized testing is a easy and seemingly unbiased way to measure student achievement, but they take a huge toll on the students and teacher. Students become stressed, over whelmed, and miss out on valuable instruction time. Teachers also become stressed because they know student failure has repercussions for them as well. I understand the value of standardized testing as a way to measure student progress, but I also think high-stakes, hyper-testing is dangerous to the American student.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me our standardized testing has ended up as a no win situation, testing is suppose to offer feedback and measure student comprehension but often ends up stressing out students more. When you are spending time teaching to the test instead of spending time teaching material out of a fear of your students not performing well enough, you miss out on a lot of actual teaching time. I agree with MC where they say "What people fail to do after they receive the test scores is to go back and actually start making changes." This idea of returning to the material or making chances seems like a natural next step but too often it seems there is a lag period where you need so many years of test results to make any changes. If you have students in these intermittent years just being taught how to take the test they miss out on any benefits of the test process. I am not a great test-taker. If you put me in front of a test, even if I studied and can explain the material well outside of class, my brain blanks, just blank stares. The idea that my performance on a test impacts whether I graduate or not, puts a huge mental toll on the student. I disagree with RC where they say "While it is true that some students are not very good test takers, by having them go through tests every year it helps them develop skills that can help them do better on the tests." I don't think this is the goal we should be moving towards. Tests are a tool that is intended to be used diagnostically, not as the ultimate measure of understanding.
ReplyDelete