Anyone disappointed in a curriculum after you got your dc's test scores back?

[creekmom]

Just wondering...

[Whereneverever]

:notes:

[sagira]

bump

[LizzyBee]

I've always felt like low test scores reflect my kids' particular weaknesses, not a problem with curriculum. I've never changed curriculum based on test scores, although I have changed priorities or added supplemental work.

[Chris in VA]

Teaching Textbooks Geometry.

[MerryAtHope]

Yes, and I changed curriculum and they got much improved scores the next year. But the areas were ones I was already struggling to find something I liked anyway--so it wasn't like I thought I had the perfect fit and had to give it up. I did switch from a method I preferred (from more cm/natural to more direct, incremental approaches and even a workbook in one area). I'm really glad I switched, I learned a lot more about my kids and myself along the way, and it really helped them.

 

I think with test scores there are so many variables--sometimes you really need more than one year's scores to know the full story (was it just a bad testing day, were you surprised by some low scores, is it a case where your scope & sequence didn't line up with that year's test, or was it what you expected?) Also--the curriculum you use may be working, they may improve next year and you'll see that growth from one year to the next, even if it still leaves them not working at as high a level as you want. If your gut is telling you that you really need to try something else, do the research, ask lots of questions, and try it out.

 

Merry :-)

[MIch elle]

Not on the test scores but what was contained in the test that the curriculum didn't cover.

[Miss Marple]

Yes, BJU's English series for grade school. My son's ITBS scores plummeted after having been quite good using ABeka. We only used it the one year and promptly switched and scores improved.

[klmama]

I've always felt like low test scores reflect my kids' particular weaknesses, not a problem with curriculum. I've never changed curriculum based on test scores, although I have changed priorities or added supplemental work.

 

:iagree:

[Bee]

then I realized it was as Merry said. My dd's math scope and sequence didn't match what was on the test. I hesitate to blame low test scores completely on the curriculum though. I believe that textbooks are probably best when it comes to covering what you need to know for the test but it won't bring the scores up excessively if the subject is one that a child struggles with. FWIW, my dd used BJUP English and scored in the top 10 percentile for that portion of her test. And sometimes it can just be a child having an off day or, as my dd did this last time, getting bored and tired of test taking but continuing on just to get it over with.

 

My own cynicism about tests has recently grown as I realized that our state tests required in the ps are published by McGraw-Hill. Not that they are a terrible company for any reason but they are text book publishers and they do have an interest in persuading schools to buy their materials so the children will do well on the required tests. Interestingly, even before I found that out, I tested dd through Hewitt. After seeing some of her scores I considered using material they recommend because I thought, briefly, that the material should cover what was on the test. Then I came to my senses and remembered it wasn't just all about the test.

[lionfamily1999]

We started using a different spelling program. We'd been using something I had found online, but his scores let me know it wasn't doing its job.

 

We also switched math, but that was just because I thought he could have done better, iykwIm.

[EKS]

My own cynicism about tests has recently grown as I realized that our state tests required in the ps are published by McGraw-Hill. Not that they are a terrible company for any reason but they are text book publishers and they do have an interest in persuading schools to buy their materials so the children will do well on the required tests.

 

Yes--In WA, the state test is produced by Pearson, the company who also publishes Investigations and CMP, the horrific math programs used in so many schools in WA, including our district. Districts like the math programs because they "align well with the WASL". Well, DUH--of course they do! GRRR.

 

Rant over.

[Kristi67]

I don't test because we aren't required to. It is an option for evaluating, but we can also use portfolio assessment or use a supervising teacher. That being said, do you test because you are required to?

 

The reason I ask is that I listened to Voddie Baucham at our state homeschool convention (Iowa). He was our keynote speaker. He talked about why do we test our kids if it is not required? Those tests don't know our children like we do. They are written to work with the curriculums that the public schools use. Maybe our curriculum scope and sequence cover something at a later time than the test does. He was asking why do we follow what their tests say? They are not teaching in our homeschools. I don't mean to hijack this thread, but it raises the question in my mind.

[mommytobees]

Yes and no.

 

Math, no. Neither of my children have done poorly in math, but they have missed problems due to not having studied the material. Then I just ignored the ones that were wrong.

 

History, Science, and Geography, no. We study what we study. Sorry, if my kids can't tell the test anything about Plymouth since we hadn't yet studied American History...... I'm not changing their studies for the test. Same with science.

 

English, yes. We've jumped around and around and around and I have NOT been happy with the results. At the end of 4th grade, due to the testing scores, I finally threw my hands up into the air and had a fit. Researched, reread my WTM, and settled with Voyages in English for Grammar. My son's 5th grade test scores were SO. MUCH. Better! So, now both of my kids are doing Voyages until the end of Grade 8. What we will do after that, don't know, maybe we won't need formal grammar?

 

So, I guess it depends on what your child didn't test well in.

 

Kris

[LUV2EDU]

I don't test because we aren't required to. It is an option for evaluating, but we can also use portfolio assessment or use a supervising teacher. That being said, do you test because you are required to?

 

The reason I ask is that I listened to Voddie Baucham at our state homeschool convention (Iowa). He was our keynote speaker. He talked about why do we test our kids if it is not required? Those tests don't know our children like we do. They are written to work with the curriculums that the public schools use. Maybe our curriculum scope and sequence cover something at a later time than the test does. He was asking why do we follow what their tests say? They are not teaching in our homeschools. I don't mean to hijack this thread, but it raises the question in my mind.

 

This is a good question. You should post a new thread on this topic.:001_smile:

[rafiki]

.

[MerryAtHope]

I don't test because we aren't required to. It is an option for evaluating, but we can also use portfolio assessment or use a supervising teacher. That being said, do you test because you are required to?

 

The reason I ask is that I listened to Voddie Baucham at our state homeschool convention (Iowa). He was our keynote speaker. He talked about why do we test our kids if it is not required? Those tests don't know our children like we do. They are written to work with the curriculums that the public schools use. Maybe our curriculum scope and sequence cover something at a later time than the test does. He was asking why do we follow what their tests say? They are not teaching in our homeschools. I don't mean to hijack this thread, but it raises the question in my mind.

 

I don't "follow what the tests say." I use the test as one of many assessment tools to help me decide what's best for my kids. To that end, I found them somewhat helpful in taking a serious look at both curriculum and teaching strategies, plus my kids' learning styles and their strengths and weaknesses. For me, tests confirmed some of what I already knew, but also helped me see the scope and seriousness of the issues I knew were issues.

 

Merry :-)

[LizzyBee]

I don't test because we aren't required to. It is an option for evaluating, but we can also use portfolio assessment or use a supervising teacher. That being said, do you test because you are required to?

 

The reason I ask is that I listened to Voddie Baucham at our state homeschool convention (Iowa). He was our keynote speaker. He talked about why do we test our kids if it is not required? Those tests don't know our children like we do. They are written to work with the curriculums that the public schools use. Maybe our curriculum scope and sequence cover something at a later time than the test does. He was asking why do we follow what their tests say? They are not teaching in our homeschools. I don't mean to hijack this thread, but it raises the question in my mind.

 

My state requires that we test annually using a nationally-normed test. However, I'd probably test even if not required to. The test isn't the be-all end-all, and sometimes there are things on the test that we haven't covered yet. But testing is one tool I can use to see how I'm doing as a homeschool teacher and to make sure I have an accurate understanding of my kids' strengths and weaknesses. Besides, when I was a kid, I enjoyed standardized tests, and my kids do too. :D

[Ashkraw]

I standardize test bexause I want to see their progression adn weaknesses. I changed Math this past year and saw a wonderful inprovment in my daughters scores. She actuallt mastered her level. SHe was weak in spelling... phonics.. which I already knew from a previous private school mistake. Thia has slowly been improving over the years.

 

I am most interested in the reading, language and math and listening scores.

 

I have used it to adjust my curriculum. Especially if a weakness persists.

 

Good luck and don't beat your self up on this. As a homeschool mom you are giving them an awesome education.

 

Monica:001_smile:

[asta]

I think it depends on the test.

 

I don't give a hoot about the Terra Nova, but if he does poorly on the PSAT? You bet we're going to readjust.

 

As much as I believe "teaching to the test" is a bunch of hooey (this year was the first time he took a standardized test, and he's in 9th grade), the reality of life is that, if a kid is even considering going to university, they have to do decently on the SAT or ACT. I don't want to teach to those tests, but will end up doing so.

 

 

a

[SBP]

I hate feeling this way, but... yes. We did a fill-in year with BJU Math (between finishing RightStart in 4th and beginning ChalkDust in 6th. I thought we'd had a pretty good year with it, too, but DS's test scores dropped significantly in math this year after years of slow-but-steady improvement with RS. I'm perfectly willing to admit that it might not be the curriculum, as such, but the fact that I didn't teach it as well (I hated the TM, frankly; I was spoiled by the clarity and simplicity of the RightStart TM's, I think) but in the end, I can't help looking at those lower test scores and being glad I spent the money on ChalkDust for next year.

 

SBP

[abbeyej]

I tend to look more at ways *I* can improve my teaching, or shore up a child's weaknesses. I don't usually assume it's the *curriculum* if my child doesn't score as well in an area as I would have liked. I suppose it's possible that if I had already seen weaknesses in the curriculum and the test confirmed it, it might be enough to cause me to change, but most likely in that circumstance, I would already know there was a problem and probably would have changed sooner...

[Mom0012]

My own cynicism about tests has recently grown as I realized that our state tests required in the ps are published by McGraw-Hill. Not that they are a terrible company for any reason but they are text book publishers and they do have an interest in persuading schools to buy their materials so the children will do well on the required tests. Interestingly, even before I found that out, I tested dd through Hewitt. After seeing some of her scores I considered using material they recommend because I thought, briefly, that the material should cover what was on the test. Then I came to my senses and remembered it wasn't just all about the test.

 

This is exactly what I have been pondering while choosing a grammar curriculum this year. I almost chose a program that I do not feel it is as strong as R&S because I felt my child would probably test better if he used this other program. I think he would test better because it teaches to state standards and I suspect the format is similar to what we would find when testing.

 

I think it's important to be able to test well, but I don't want to sacrifice what I believe is a better educational choice just so that my child will do well on the test.

 

This last year my child's math computation score went from well below average, to above average and I believe it is simply because we used different test prep materials and not because he was doing any worse the prior year. This experience has really made me think very differently about testing.

 

Lisa