Rant about state testing in schools

[Rokkitsci]

Where did I say that the trouble makers and unmotivated students should be a higher priority? It sounds like your school needs to figure out how to handle these discipline problems. I think in all my years of referring students to the office, I only had to escort 2 or 3 to the office. Most recently I would call the office and tell them the student was coming down. If they didn't show up, someone would go out looking for them. I agree with some of the problems you mention with our permissive society, but how does discarding the problem students alleviate that problem?

I agree with you - but in our school, if we send them out of the room we have to escort them to the office and fill out paperwork during class time. That makes us endure a lot of disruption that we should not have to because it is a tradeoff as to what is the best way to continue with a lesson. And - we have no way to call the office - we have no communication.
I am new to teaching, so I thought our procedures are the norm. I have questioned before why I have to further interrupt my class when someone will just not behave.
I wish we could spend a few bucks on an intercom system to the office rather than a new TV. We have one way communication - they can speak to me, but I cannot initiate a communication to them. That would surely be an improvement.
Also - I don't want to discard them into society. I want them in a boot camp environment that will teach them how to get along in a courteous society.

 

[Rokkitsci]

Also, I have to partially agree with the posters who question the concept of children who are " bright but don't test well". I have many times wondered why we question the tests and assume our children are bright. However, anyone who has witnessed a child who gets a question wrong and then given the chance to answer it one more time, with NO changes in the questioning, simply a change in the stress level, would have to agree that there is a great deal of truth to that philosophy. I don't know what the answer is, just know that it's a truth to deal with in my family and professional life.That is why standardized tests should never be the entire picture. THey also completely discount the advantage of being a hard worker, working to overcome a difficulty. That is something I never want to teach my students. Hard work can take you a long way.

And one more thing.... Why, oh why do we as educators continue to study and research HOW people learn when in our professional lives we will never be able to use that information and actually teach that way? We know so much about learning and we use a fraction of it in the field.
QUOTE]
I have always just shrugged when I hear these tales about "bright children who just don't test well." I am sure there is some truth in "test anxiety" because I have experienced that to varying degrees in my life. But, if we teach the subject matter well, the student will be able to answer questions about that subject regardless of who asks the question.

I have seen these standardized test questions. There is absolutely nothing tricky about them. The knowledge they are testing comprises the most fundamental concepts of the subject. If you cannot answer these questions, you do not know the subject - regardless of how "bright" your parents think you are.

While no test is perfect, I think it is a great idea to require some sort of standardized test to make sure that we are not just producing students who "feel good about themselves" but are completely unable to identify the most basic concepts of the subjects they are supposed to be learning.

I object vigorously to teachers who just "teach the test" = meaning that they spend a week before the test showing their students what is on it and showing them "how to work them." However, I completely endorse the concept of "teaching the test" = meaning that we should be absolutely positive that our teaching addresses the content of the test.

I do not agree with the attitude of "let me teach what I want to teach, and don't make my students take any standard tests." I invite any standard tests at any time in any of my classes. In fact I wish we had more of them. I like the idea of some outside source of questions. That way my students would know they are learning the subject, not just some favorite formulation of my own. I want them to know they are ready for anything - from anybody - at any time.

We need to support our teachers fully. But we also need to make sure that the instruction our students are receiving is up to minimal standards. I still believe the biggest problem we have in education is the culture that is producing the students. We must require that teachers do their jobs properly, but we must also require that parents share the blame for their childrens failures. Without the parents making sure their children are being raised as good citizens, no amount of money or testing will help.

 

[RUDisney]

I have seen these standardized test questions. There is absolutely nothing tricky about them. The knowledge they are testing comprises the most fundamental concepts of the subject. If you cannot answer these questions, you do not know the subject - regardless of how "bright" your parents think you are.

Do you not think that some students learn differently, therefore they also, as a result, will test differently?

I am an auditory learner. Don't make me read anything because I won't remember it, especially if the subject matter doesn't interest me. However, if I hear something, quite literally, I will remember it forever. When it comes to standardized testing, I, for one, do not test well. It's not pressure or stress, it's boredom and torture. However, if given an oral exam, or an essay exam, I will excel. In terms of the essay, I can hear the answer in my head and convert my thoughts to paper. Standardized testing always made me feel boxed in and pressured to pick one of the canned answers. Perhaps what you consider to be blue, I consider to be azure. They both mean the same thing, but on a standardized test, perhaps the symantics of the answer will cause me to select a different response.

That is how I can see that bright students may not do well on what you consider to be straight-forward, easy tests.

I object vigorously to teachers who just "teach the test" = meaning that they spend a week before the test showing their students what is on it and showing them "how to work them." However, I completely endorse the concept of "teaching the test" = meaning that we should be absolutely positive that our teaching addresses the content of the test.

Our district has been teaching the test all year... not just the week before the test. Concepts have been mungled together without ensuring that there is any true grasp of a concept. I've said to you on a different thread that one week my DS had multiplication homework one night, geometric shapes another and by the end of the week, they were studying time. The district is trying to make them jacks of all trades but masters of none. If much rather the "Charles Emerson Winchester" approach of doing one thing very well and then moving on. My DH and I transferred our children to public school this year because my DD needed the special learning assistance that it could offer. We also live in a "very good" district. She has gotten a lot of help with reading, and also went through necessary eye therapy. We are debating sending them for one more year to public school, or sending them back to private because historically, the private schools actually teach... because they can... because they are allowed to do so because they aren't just teaching for the tests... for their own grades.

I do not agree with the attitude of "let me teach what I want to teach, and don't make my students take any standard tests." I invite any standard tests at any time in any of my classes. In fact I wish we had more of them. I like the idea of some outside source of questions. That way my students would know they are learning the subject, not just some favorite formulation of my own. I want them to know they are ready for anything - from anybody - at any time.

What's the difference if it is your whim that they are learning, or the governments? Other than the fact that the government's is the one that is being forced on everyone. Either one could be the "right" one or the wrong one.

We need to support our teachers fully. But we also need to make sure that the instruction our students are receiving is up to minimal standards. I still believe the biggest problem we have in education is the culture that is producing the students. We must require that teachers do their jobs properly, but we must also require that parents share the blame for their childrens failures. Without the parents making sure their children are being raised as good citizens, no amount of money or testing will help.

I am all for teachers being able to grade the parents of their students and for funding for counseling some of those parents to do better for their kids once the situation is investigated. Without accountability from the parents for their kids' well-being, we're just kidding ourselves. A student can have the best teacher in the world, but without the proper support system at home, there isn't much that the teacher or the school can do.

 

[chobie]

A student can have the best teacher in the world, but without the proper support system at home, there isn't much that the teacher or the school can do.

This is true and I also agree with most of your post. The problem is that how can we expect a child to do well in school who may be dealing with life problems that we cannot begin to imagine.? For example, kids that are homeless, kids who will go home to no food, kids who have to work afterschool to help supoort their younger siblings etc. The list goes on and on...

What about kids going to school in crumbling, toxic buildings? It's great that the Federal government wants to set high standards and bring all kids up to a higher level of education, but if they don't provide the money then it's just another bit of political grandstanding.