As a newspaper columnist on psychology, I focus on questions that might be of interest to Central Coast readers. Some of my articles take significant research and consideration before they are ready for publication. Other articles don't seem as though they will work for the column. I plan to use this forum to work out ideas, get feedback for additional points of view and find out what issues might be of most interest to people locally. Please write: Dr. Andrew Millar at gmail.comToday I'm working on an idea about the problems with applying the results of school-based standardized testing to make decisions about schools and the careers of educators.
These are achievement tests, assessing what students know. I know of no research that supports the use of these test results for political and administrative decisions.
The STAR Test Defined
After a few years of controversy and changes, the current version of this testing program in California is STAR, for Standardized Testing And Reporting. The news has reported how teachers throughout the country are motivated to teach about how to take tests well, which sacrifices time and energy they might otherwise use to teach academic subjects. Some have even cheated by giving students test answers and correcting answer sheets before the tests are submitted for scoring.
There are incentives for good outcomes, including bonus money. There are consequences for low-level outcomes, including probation status for schools and possible job termination for teachers and principals.
Psychologists are well-trained in developing, using and interpreting standardized testing. I believe that testing can provide useful information. I have no quarrel with a well-designed test.
Can A Test Measure A Teacher's Ability?
The problem is that the tests are not necessarily good indicators of teacher ability and school adequacy. They measure student knowledge, but student knowledge is influenced by more than just teacher and school performance. Some students know more about some subjects because of things they have learned at home.
The most prominent example are the results of tests of ability in language. I can do well in English tests, largely because I learned English from my family. I would fail any test of Spanish, French, Hmong or any other language.
What the standardized tests showed in past years is that some parts of the county have a higher proportion of native English speakers in the schools.
We don't need the expense of statewide testing to find that out.
What We Really Need To Do
We also don't need to sanction teachers for teaching at schools where the students don't have the extracurricular advantages that will give them an edge on tests.
I know that we can use tests to tell how individual students and groups of students compare on abilities. We can use the results to guide decisions about academic abilities and needs for improvement. We can decide where to place community resources so that students have the best chance for success.
It is up to the school system to prove that rewarding and punishing teachers and schools for students' test performance will benefit society. It would be best that they conduct the necessary experiments on small samples of students and teachers before they make the entire academic population the subjects of a state- and nation-wide experiment, because they might be wrong.
Their being wrong will cost us all time, money, opportunities and possibly the expertise of good educators who might stop teaching after being punished for something over which they have no real control.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.