Teaching to the standardized tests... Why, Why, Why?

[cardaway]

Starting last week the kids in the day care have been going to "tutoring" classes. Ony yesterday did I find out they are actually going to specific study classes because it was determined they need to work on certain thing before the state tests are given.

I suspect this has everything to do with the schools thrying to get their collective test scores higher.

Good idea or bad idea?

 

[In a hurry]

Bad idea. Nothing is learned. Nothing is gained except the school/teacher rep.

Seems the score were higher 20 years ago, when we just taught the kids a solid curriculum. (Not necessarily a great curriculum, but it worked better than this!)

 

[palmtreegirl]

Terrible idea.

 

[bananiem]

The schools don't have a choice because of NCLB. They have to show adequate yearly progress or the school will be put on the "bad school" list. If they don't bring the scores up after that the district has to let parents choose another school for their child to attend, and the district has to pay the transportation cost.
Also, each grade level is tested against the previous year's scores. I feel sorry for the grade that follows my dd's class. They are a bunch of smart cookies and their scores were phenomenal. And not the kind of scores that a school should expect to get continually.

 

[ZebraStripes]

We've got the Connecticut Mastery Tests coming up in March. My DD is in 4th grade and she has been stressed since about December about these tests. She doesn't know why they take them, just that they keep practicing and practicing. I told her there is nothing she needs to worry about, that whatever score she gets is good. Its bad enough that she is struggling with Everyday Math. I understand the NCLB and all, but kids don't need this stress.

 

[Planogirl]

They devote whole days to drills and practice tests here. It's the biggest joke but the schools are powerless to do anything about it.

We can thank our former governor and his cronies for most of this.

 

[Buckalew11]

Bad idea. Terrible idea. Around here public schools teach the tests all year long. After the tests are over, the kids think the school year should be over also. I know the teachers that I talk to in PS hate what it has all become.

 

[BriarfoxinWA]

Don't get me started on this!

Washington State has the standardized WASL test which consists entirely of essay type questions. The kids take it every couple of years starting in 4th grade. My DS15 is in 10th grade and is in the first class that will be required to pass the 10th grade WASL in order to get his diploma. All of our schools revolve around passing this stupid test. They are eliminating classes like art, choir, history etc...because these subjects are not on "the test".

Here is a good example of how stupid this test is: DS15 is a wiz in math BUT - he not only has to provide the right answer for a math problem he has to write out all of the steps he takes to get to that right answer. If he misses one minor step or writes outside of the box provided- but has the correct answer to the problem he will still get it wrong. To top it off - the company that has the state contract for grading these tests is a party to several lawsuits from other states for incorrect grading. I can't get DS's test copies from the last one he took in 7th grade because they have already been destroyed. I have a friend that reviewed her daughter's test and found correct answers that were marked as being wrong

I could opt him out of the test - but we aren't sure whether he would then be able to graduate or not. DH & I were discussing having DS go to the community college and take the GED test - then having him opt out of taking the WASL.

 

[cardaway]

But lots of people just have thought it was a good idea for it to be this wide spread. Even if you don't agree, what do you think they were thinking was the benefit?

I am failing to come up with anything.

 

[TimeforMe]

No, you can thank GWB for this, although most of these tests were in place before him. I wonder just how much progress has been made and at what expense. DD (who is now a sr. in hs) stressed more about CMTs etc. than she did about her SATs. It's a horrible situation that neither teachers nor parents are happy about.

 

[The Mystery Machine]

But lots of people just have thought it was a good idea for it to be this wide spread. Even if you don't agree, what do you think they were thinking was the benefit?

I am failing to come up with anything.

Are you talking DAYCARE? How do they enforce testing at DAYCARE? What grade level?
Or is this optional that a parent can sign up for?

If it is optional, well I can understand that parents know that the kid has to do well and if they have trouble you would take advantage of tutoring, right?

 

[cardaway]

Are you talking DAYCARE? How do they enforce testing at DAYCARE? What grade level?
Or is this optional that a parent can sign up for?

We run a home day care and we have been having to deal with changing schedules due to these after school "tutoring" classes. I have no idea if they are required or optional, I'll ask though.

 

[In a hurry]

My honest opinion is that kids kept getting more and more ignorant and those in power panicked. So a committee has decided not to fix the ultimate problem (lack of basic knowledge) but the big picture appearance (US kids look dumb in spite of the money thrown at them.) So any idea that sounds good (make schools prove they are teaching) is thrown at the problem. It doesn't help the underlying issues, though.

The teaching industry is known for following flakes and fools. Hairbrained wins out over commen-sense all too often. Whole word, new math, limited history and science, making everything "hands-on" and experiential (works great for some topics, sucks for the rest!) Not allowing kids to work to their level (segregating into red reading group, blue, and green, because of the "stigma of being in the green group) even though that allows teachers to spend the time teaching the basics to a smaller group. Worrying about "self esteem" without realizing that is through true accomplishment that kids feel good about themselves.

So, in a way the same people complaining about the testing are the ones who screwed everything up so royally!

And the ones who suffer are the kids!

~~stepping quietly off soap-box~~

 

[The Mystery Machine]

I guess I can explain it this way...I am new to Texas, we are from Missouri. Missouri only does "assessment" tests. (Don't need to pass to move forward.)

Texas does TAKS, in which you HAVE TO PASS to move forward in your grade.

Tutoring is a good idea for kids so they can pass to move up in their grade. Older dd who is a freshman in HS, has gone to lots of tutoring this year.
Younger dd gets 100% on everything and wouldn't need tutoring.

I am happy they do it.

 

[Galahad]

The schools don't have a choice because of NCLB.

1) It's a bad thing all way round.
2) You really can't blame NCLB though. Most states began using these standardized tests before NCLB and most of them had consequences to the schools. Teaching to the test did not begin with Senator Kennedy's education bill.

I wish there was a way to either prevent schools/teachers from seeing the tests, therefore eliminating the ability to teach to the test. Or even just forbid the practice. It really doesn't measure anything more than how well they learned that test.

 

[In a hurry]

Tutoring for a difficult subject is different than tutoring for a test. I would never have passed my first Algebra class without a tutor. But he didn't teach me how to do the problems most likely listed on the test, he taught me how to think in Algebra. That allowed me to complete my higher math. I'm not saying it well, but there is a difference. His goal was to teach me...not to pass a test.

 

[BeNJeNWaFFLe]

Here in NY we have the Regent's exams. Now, when I was in HS they were optional. If you wanted that extra title on your diploma you took the required Regents exams. Now they made them mandatory for everyone. They teach you to pass the tests, not to learn the subject.

NY also does (or at least did) assessment tests. They were never graded and you didn't have to "pass" them to move on. We never prepared for those. We just knew that Tuesday was the day of the English test so bring your pens and Thursday was the day of the Math test so bring your number two pencils.

I understand an assessment test. We never stressed out about them, we never studied for them, and once they were done you were happy youd didn't have to sit in those little desks in the gym anymore. Now that the Regent's exams are mandatory my diploma isn't as special was it was. I don't understand the whole idea of standardized tests. And I stressed out about them more than I did my SAT's.

 

[cardaway]

Called and found out that our the local schools are not requiring them but the majority of kids have been "invited" to attend at least one "tutoring" based on what they need the most help in. Since there is one for basically every subject, almost every kid has something they need help with.

 

[MICKEY88]

this is quite interesting.I remember about a year ago,reading of several schools that were under investigation for teaching the tests, the article stated that if they were found to be guilty, they would lose state and federal funding... and be fined...

if I remember correctly the schools were from several states..

 

[bcvillastwo]

I've been following the ongoing debates about the quality of our state school education system for some time and it's really interesting.

On the one hand there is ample evidence that the state schools aren't doing a great job. In nearly every area nearly every measure shows our education system is in a state of decline (at least from when I was a kid in the 50's).

The answer has been and continues to be--more money is needed. But, then there's ample evidence that this doesn't solve the basic problem at all.

So, we become concerned and devise a system that attempts to solve the problem by requiring the students to pass standardized tests. Then, well the predictable happens, there is something wrong because the teachers are teaching to the tests.

Maybe standardized tests aren't the answer. But, I then I think about what was happening before we went to standardized tests. Well there's pretty strong evidence that the state schools weren't performing very well. But, wait they weren't teaching to the test in those days were they.

From what I can see the state schools didn't do a very good job before we had standardized testing and the early evidence is they aren't doing an appreciably better job under a standardized testing environment.

But to be fair, we had well over 50 years where there were no standardized tests and less than 10 under standardized testing. Have we had enough time yet to fairly assess the use of standardized testing.

Oh one more thing, the move towards standardized testing started a good while before G.W. Bush became President. I don't think he thought this up while he was Governor of Texas.

Wait, wait, wait, I forgot in some circles President Bush is behind every problem we have in this country.