I am confused by the controversy of teaching to the test

[happycc]

Basically the test (state testing) has basic math and language art skills that kids need to know anyways. So what is the controversy? I am confused. Someone enlighten me.

[briansmama]

Teaching to the test means that children are spending much of their time only learning what will be on the test, to the point that science, literature, history, art, music, foreign language, creativity, meaningful projects, poetry, etc are practically non-existent, or at the very least certainly not prioritized.

 

Critics lament the lack of creativity and problem-solving skills children exhibit after spending years in a learning environment that places importance of standardized tests over a quality, well-rounded education. Research also shows that children are likely to lose much if the information after testing because there is little meaning associated with the information (Einstein Never Used Flash Cards is a great read filled with research that discusses the perils of learning environments focused on standardized tests).

[MinivanMom]

Usually when someone uses the phrase "teaching to the test" they are not talking about teaching children basic math and language art skills. They are talking about doing test prep with children to the exclusion of topics that are not on the test. For example, when I was teaching public schools one of the 3rd grade teachers had a reputation for "teaching to the test". She had a 30 min period set aside daily for test prep. From August until April her students spent 30 min doing practice tests and filling in bubbles every single day. This took the place of science, social studies, and art in her classroom. Her students drilled math problems, but the students who had already mastered 3rd grade math weren't allowed to move on to more advanced math concepts. Her students drilled reading comprehension passages, but they didn't read books. That is "teaching to the test".

 

Deciding that you're not going to teach your children cursive, typing, art, music, science, history, geography, literature or poetry, because they aren't on the test would fit my definition of "teaching to the test". Obsessively drilling your children on estimation, because you suspect it may be on the test would also fit my definition of "teaching to the test".

 

Giving your child a solid foundation in reading, language arts, and math is not "teaching to the test". That falls under my definition of providing a child with a good education. It will also enable your children to score well on any standardized test. Educate your children, but don't "teach to the test". There is a difference.

[happycc]

My kids are using WWE and FLL and a lot of information in there is in the state test. Math we do refer to the state textbooks to fill in gaps. We do history and science-classical styled but have Zingy and Study Island to fill in the gaps too.

Plus we do logic and latin --not state tested.

Art and music--eh no time for much of that unfortunately though. The kids draw, color, doodle, make movies with their videos and legos etc. And garden.

Projects -my house is a project ...a big fat science project ;)

[mandymom]

Also, they spend a great deal of time on HOW to take the particular test, not on the material. For instance, if one type of essay is required on the test, all effort is on that one particular essay and no time on the other types. Much time is spent teaching the kids how to pick out the correct answer (my kids' school called them "strategies") not on the actual subject matter at hand. They had pep rallies, week-long TAAS (now STARR) "camps", they got them t-shirts, the whole bit. Not only that, but it seemed like at least twice a week, the kids were taking "benchmark" tests to see how they were doing. It was ridiculous. My kids passed those exams with flying colors, often 100% in most subject areas. They were getting incredibly short-changed in their education because almost all of school time was focused on those stupid tests. Sucked all the joy out of learning.

[Hunter]

When tests do test content subjects, some parents don't want to teach the state's PS scope and sequence for science and social studies, for a variety of reasons.

[Lori D.]

Another negative connotation to the term "teaching to the test" is that rather than teaching students how to think, make connections, and analyze -- i.e., how to learn -- students are encouraged to memorize long enough to do well on a test so the teacher or school gets a good rating -- and then the students promptly forget/purge the test facts.

 

"Teaching to the test" is the result of trying to improve declining education levels by writing policies and standards, rather than addressing underlying individual issues for poor educational performance. So testing becomes "hoop jumping" to meet policies rather than a true measure of progress and development of critical thinking and reasoning abilities of the individual student, and educators have to move to "teaching to the test" to show they are meeting policies, rather than being able to truly educate, inspire and mentor students with true learning.

 

JMO! Warmly, Lori D.

[Clear Creek]

Teaching to the test (the end-of-year test) in my state means teaching methods of deducing the correct answer, not doing the actual work. They spend hours (and hours and hours) teaching children how to plug the answer choices into the math question to see which one is the correct answer, not teaching how to actually solve the problem. They spend days teaching the children how to skim reading passages for key words, not actually read the passage and infer anything from it. In some subjects (science and social studies) the teaching is limited to what will be covered on the test...the exact topics that will be covered on the test, so that the students can anwer the questions correctly. Basically, they are teaching the students how to answer the test questions correctly, not teaching the students the material so that they actually know it.

 

Reminds me of when I was in the Army at DLI studying Arabic...one of my instructors told us that if we ever were unsure of a question on a test, the test writers liked happy events and happy endings, so we should go with the answer that was happier...and he was right, LOL!

[IceFairy]

I have a good, personal example. I was on the Academic Decathlon Team in high school. We were taught to test well. My freshman year I placed in 8 of 10 catergories. I took 5th place in Math statewide. Here is the thing....I suck at math. I was passing Algebra 2 only because the kid in front of me was a geek who had a crush on me who held his answers up and who did my homework. But because I was taught to test, I aced math at the meet.

[serendipitous journey]

I have found that my child is not testing esp. well in areas where he is working grade-level (in mathematics he is so far ahead of grade level that it isn't an issue). We do not use FLL, or much WWE; we're using some KISS, some MCT, some Galore Park materials, Winning with Writing & IEW, and Ambleside. We school via a charter, which provides funds and expects us to sit the standardized tests.

 

Many of the questions on the Language Arts section of the sample test made little sense to A., who leads a pretty sheltered homeschooler life and has few common cultural referents. So this is a child who understood, for example, the dangers of letting a foreign army into your country no matter how desperate you are (via his history readings) and thought the Alice in Wonderland jokes about William the Conqueror were hilarious, and whose read-alouds and independent reads are well ahead of grade level, but he was not able to extract whatever information from sample excerpts the testers thought he should extract. I called the Critical Thinking Company about test-prep materials, because the actual test prep books I got from Amazon were not things I wanted to spend time on -- the writing samples seemed inferior and the analysis shallow. The Critical Thinking Folks said they do not teach test prep for just these reasons ... so that's one perspective.

 

I think it'll be less of an issue when he's older, because he will be working far ahead of his grade level; and in a year or two it will be a trivial matter to have him do weekly test-prep exercises. But test-taking is a specific skill that requires teaching if the child is to be a good test-taker, and if we want our children to be good test-takers, it is a skill that must be taught in addition to other skills I think.

[Targhee]

There is a big difference between teaching students the things they need to know and also familiarity with the test, and "teaching to the test." It's like the difference between exploring with c-rods and seeing how two purple rods make a brown rod, and then explaining how we can write 4 + 4 = 8 and telling a kids that any time you see 4 + 4 write 8.

[Momling]

I was a public middle school teacher for a while and I'm not altogether certain that teaching to pass a test is such a bad thing. I think it depends on the material being taught and how it's being taught.

 

I taught in a self-contained 7th grade class, so I sat in on all the departments meetings. The math department was focused and were already following a curriculum and the test aligned with it, so that was fine... but the English department was a mess. The kids had horrible skills, were unable to punctuate or capitalize a sentence, couldn't spell, and had no knowledge about words such as "antonym" or "plot" or "noun". They had never been taught such things... Instead, they'd been taught to read with whole language and by middle school, English was about drawing pictures to illustrate stories or stream-of-consciousness writing. When the testing was instituted, the English department tried to rebel. I actually found it such a relief to have something specific to teach. I dove right in to "teaching to the test" and my kids learned. Of course, I also went out of my way to make the material interesting and fun and relevant outside of a test context... but just because a test was the end goal, didn't make the experience any better or worse than any other learning experience.

 

Also... I loved the AP classes I took, and have taught TOEFL and GED and SAT prep classes and made those a lot of fun for my students. My own kids have had a great time studying for the Latin Exams and Mythology Exams. I think a test gives them a goal and set of material to learn and a result that reflects what they've been studying. I don't see anything inherently wrong with any of that.

[Arcadia]

The problem in B&M schools here is that some teachers only teach the subjects tested. When older was in B&M, science was once or twice a year, social studies was the class parties for halloween, thanksgiving and all the other festivals, music was christmas concert and art was a few times a year. So from K to 4, only LA and Math were hopefully taught well. 5th grade is when they catch up on science for Star testing. That was a big reason we went from B&M to virtual academy.

[Mom2OandE]

Usually when someone uses the phrase "teaching to the test" they are not talking about teaching children basic math and language art skills. They are talking about doing test prep with children to the exclusion of topics that are not on the test. For example, when I was teaching public schools one of the 3rd grade teachers had a reputation for "teaching to the test". She had a 30 min period set aside daily for test prep. From August until April her students spent 30 min doing practice tests and filling in bubbles every single day. This took the place of science, social studies, and art in her classroom. Her students drilled math problems, but the students who had already mastered 3rd grade math weren't allowed to move on to more advanced math concepts. Her students drilled reading comprehension passages, but they didn't read books. That is "teaching to the test".

 

 

Deciding that you're not going to teach your children cursive, typing, art, music, science, history, geography, literature or poetry, because they aren't on the test would fit my definition of "teaching to the test". Obsessively drilling your children on estimation, because you suspect it may be on the test would also fit my definition of "teaching to the test".

 

Giving your child a solid foundation in reading, language arts, and math is not "teaching to the test". That falls under my definition of providing a child with a good education. It will also enable your children to score well on any standardized test. Educate your children, but don't "teach to the test". There is a difference.

 

 

This is exactly what my child experienced in 3rd grade at the #1 school in Fl and one of the reasons we now homeschool.

[Bootsie]

I have a friend who is a high school math teacher. She was sent to a seminar in which she was taught how to teach her students how to answer math questions on the standardized test without reading the question.

 

I teach a college finance course. I have a student who is struggling who came by earlier in the semester and asked what he needed to do. I suggested that he read the textbook and he asked, "What do you mean? How do I do that?" A few weeks later he proudly told me that he had found copies of old finance exams so he was doing a couple of questions every day on those exams like he had studied for standardized tests in high school because that is how he learns rather than reading the book. Needless to say, he did poorly on the midterm exam. I find that students who "learned" by practicing old tests day in and day out do not have a context for any knowledge. Subject matter is simply a collection of random questions to learn rather than a coherent body of knowledge.

[Alte Veste Academy]

 

I like to set my frustration to music. :tongue_smilie:

 

"Don't think about thinking; it's not on the test."

[Pod's mum]

nm

Edited March 28, 2013 by Moderator
Please remember not to quote from spam posts...this just preserves the spammer links and info on our site!

[boscopup]

Another good example of teaching to the test is those schools moving to multiple choice spelling. If you are NOT teaching to the test, you will teach your kids how to spell words, and they will be able to spell them as they write, and likely they'll be able to pick out the correctly spelled or misspelled word from a list of words on a standardized test, because they know how to spell. But some schools have stopped teaching spelling and only do multiple choice spelling tests now. A kid with good visual memory can pass such a test easily, yet not be able to spell to save their life! Those schools are teaching to the test - practicing how to pass the spelling portion of the standardized test, but not teaching the kids how to actually spell in their own writing.

[Hunter]

I have found that my child is not testing esp. well in areas where he is working grade-level (in mathematics he is so far ahead of grade level that it isn't an issue). We do not use FLL, or much WWE; we're using some KISS, some MCT, some Galore Park materials, Winning with Writing & IEW, and Ambleside. We school via a charter, which provides funds and expects us to sit the standardized tests.

 

Many of the questions on the Language Arts section of the sample test made little sense to A., who leads a pretty sheltered homeschooler life and has few common cultural referents. So this is a child who understood, for example, the dangers of letting a foreign army into your country no matter how desperate you are (via his history readings) and thought the Alice in Wonderland jokes about William the Conqueror were hilarious, and whose read-alouds and independent reads are well ahead of grade level, but he was not able to extract whatever information from sample excerpts the testers thought he should extract. I called the Critical Thinking Company about test-prep materials, because the actual test prep books I got from Amazon were not things I wanted to spend time on -- the writing samples seemed inferior and the analysis shallow. The Critical Thinking Folks said they do not teach test prep for just these reasons ... so that's one perspective.

 

I think it'll be less of an issue when he's older, because he will be working far ahead of his grade level; and in a year or two it will be a trivial matter to have him do weekly test-prep exercises. But test-taking is a specific skill that requires teaching if the child is to be a good test-taker, and if we want our children to be good test-takers, it is a skill that must be taught in addition to other skills I think.

 

I had a 2E child that needed to mature and learn how his thinking differed from "normies" before he could understand what the testers wanted. He didn't need test prep; he needed a crash course in how "normies" think.

 

On a test prep question he was asked what color polar bears are. according to my son, polar bears have black skin and clear hollow fur that only appears white. Technically black was the closest answer, but he guessed white, as he assumed the "normie" test makers assumed a 3rd graders wouldn't know much about polar bears and might even not know much about polar bears themselves. He got the answer right.

[G5052]

Yes, it isn't all bad if the students are given the context and broad view of the material. When it is drilled and drilled in a very rote, isolated way, it becomes what a friend of mine calls "fill and flush." They learn the material and promptly forget it after testing.

 

Many of the other countries with high achievement on reading and math use standardized curriculum and national testing. The difference is how it is taught, which includes how their teachers are prepared.

[Five More Minutes]

I was just talking with a mom who has her student enrolled in the local PS (a good school). She's frustrated because her dd, in Gr. 3, has spent hours this past month doing practice tests for the big test coming up this year. Her point: there's no new learning happening when there's that much focus on passing the test. That's what I think of when I think of "teaching to the test." It's a teaching approach that focuses on the content of the test and test-taking strategies to the exclusion of other content and skills.

 

And the sad thing is, often the content that isn't explicitly on the test is the good stuff: critical thinking, arts, science, history. Topics that, when taught well and learned, actually increase literacy because they give students the background needed to understand texts.

[TraceyS/FL]

This is exactly what my child experienced in 3rd grade at the #1 school in Fl and one of the reasons we now homeschool.

The school actually told me that my Special Needs daughter would be better off doing FCAT prep instead of going to group language therapy.... even though she would never, ever pass her grade level FCAT.

 

I told her it was HER (the counselors) reality, but my child not going to have that be her reality. Sorry.

 

(that child is back home after the disaster that was the middle school)

[Chelli]

"Teaching to the Test" is one of the big reasons that this former ps teacher is homeschooling. The whole idea of "testing" was just gaining ground when I quit teaching to stay home with my oldest.

 

Here are my top reasons that I didn't/don't like the emphasis on testing in the ps system now:

 

1. It is the single focus in education today. All curriculum and instruction is focused on getting students to pass the test.

 

2, Because of this focus there is no joy in learning anymore. The fun activities (like a semester study on Germany!) that I remember from my elementary education do not exist in ps anymore. If it's not going to be tested, we don't have time to learn about it. This is also one of the reasons why cursive, geography, science, history, the arts, p.e., recess, etc. are all being cut in the ps system. No time for that. We've got to prep for the test!

 

3. Children are told of the importance of the test which leads to test anxiety in elementary students. I know a local homeschooler who pulled her son out of ps because he had developed ulcers from being so nervous about the test. Another friend of mine, whose daughter is still in ps, posted a pic last night of her daughter working through a huge stack of worksheets to get ready for the test which is being taken next week here in Texas. Ridiculous.

 

4. And as others have mentioned, lack of critical thinking skills, logic, research skills, writing ability, etc.

[Chrysalis Academy]

 

I like to set my frustration to music. :tongue_smilie:

 

"Don't think about thinking; it's not on the test."

 

 

Thanks for the morning chuckle . . .

[Alte Veste Academy]

Tested: One American School Struggles to Make the Grade was a scary read. Much of it rings true to my own experiences working in elementary schools in central TX, where there were pep rallies for the test. PEP RALLIES! For a TEST!

 

OP, if you really want to see the damage of teaching to the test, see if your library has this book.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Tested-American-School-Struggles-Grade/dp/0805088024/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1364486988&sr=8-1&keywords=Tested

[Lang Syne Boardie]

This is a major reason why we homeschool. Teaching to the test, worshiping the test, fearing the test....it's the opposite of learning.

[Walking-Iris]

Honestly I feel those types of tests should be assessment types only. I can see some logic behind seeing where a child *is* to make a game plan for their instruction. Homeschoolers who test or even use practice test prep books usually do them for that purpose. I do not however agree with using tests to grade at the end of a year. I don't agree with tests as a measure to place them in certain age-controlled grades. And I certainly am disturbed when tests are used to decide funding for a school district. That is completely unfair to young children and teachers to place that much pressure on them. Not to mention unfair to school districts with less socio-economic advantages. IMHO it is not the responsibility of a 3rd grade age child to have the weight of district funding on their shoulders in that way. They have a natural right to an education and a childhood, and that isn't one.

 

When $$$ becomes an issue or even when merit-type pay becomes an issue, then some ps teachers begin to see no choice between making darn sure their kids do well on that test. It's called self-preservation. They want to keep their source of livelihood.

 

I have all the respect in the world for ps teachers who refuse to play that game. And when they really teach...really really teach...their kids will do well on the tests anyway.

[happycc]

So how can us homeschoolers who take the Star or state testing once a year best use the test to help guide us in our homeschooling lessons rather than hinder us? What do you all recommend to avoid using the test dangerously or incorrectly?

[Mom2TheTeam]

I understand the bigger picture of "teaching to the test" in a school setting. But, for me at home, teaching to the test means choosing curriculum and topics based on what would be on a standardized test rather than what your child/family or you, the teacher, would do well with and enjoy. It's choosing the order of what you learn based on the test rather than on educational philosophy or what is best for the individual child. I have no problem with my child learning what is on the test...as long as it's what *I* want to teach my child at that point and it's taught in the way *I* want to teach it.

 

My state requires testing for HS'ers (but has other options) and I don't like it. I worry about it and I am concerned about what curricula I use based on what is going to be on the test. So far, we don't seem to be using what would best prepare my child for the test. I'm using what is best for us and what fits my goals and educational philosophy. But, I second guess myself a lot based on being worried about testing. I have to fight my urge to change and use more traditional curricula to make sure my children are getting what they need, when they need it specifically for the test. I'm adding a formal grammar that I don't think we need this year (1st) with the test in mind. (Though, I don't have anything against doing this. I just probably wouldn't if I wasn't thinking about the test.)

 

Oh and I also feel I have to word things and teach things in a way that is going to translate into my children understanding what the test is asking. If I use a different term or something or teach it informally without using the terminology on the test, will they still be able to understand the questions and do well or will that be enough to trip them up? I don't want to have to think about that, but my brain goes that way because I want to make sure my child can do well or at least well enough.

 

For me at home, I don't want to be boxed in to teaching specific things at specific grade levels or in specific ways. It isn't that I don't want to teach them at all. I just want the freedom to choose how and when. I don't want to teach to the test, but to some degree, I have to at least consider it or risk the consequences.

 

(And...typing that out has strengthened my resolve to find another way since we have other options in my state. :D)

[susankhan]

This is exactly what my child experienced in 3rd grade at the #1 school in Fl and one of the reasons we now homeschool.

 

 

What school? We are also in Florida :)

[briansmama]

So how can us homeschoolers who take the Star or state testing once a year best use the test to help guide us in our homeschooling lessons rather than hinder us? What do you all recommend to avoid using the test dangerously or incorrectly?

 

I'd recommend skipping it, unless you are required to test by your state (we are required to for the first time this year, though not every year, just every few years).

 

If you are required, I would use the practice test as an opportunity to go over any holes your dc may have in math or language arts. This is what we are doing.

 

Just to be clear, I'm not having my ds practice the test on top of his regular lessons. During his regular math lesson time, for example, we are spending a week going over the practice test to review any concepts he may not know or immediately recall. The bummer for me is math lesson time is usually spent learning more advanced, interesting concepts (he loves football math and many concepts are beyond what he's expected to know for 3rd grade). But, he has to take the test and wants to feel prepared, so we have to spend a week reviewing triangles and bar graphs.

[mytwomonkeys]

Teaching to the test doesnt affect me personally, but i have several friends here that are public school teachers. It is a huge stress for them and the emphasis on making sure kids test well is really hard on them. IMO that kind of pressure seems unproductive and has more to do with budgets and school politics than the benefit of the student. State testing is equally stressful on the kids. Just my observation. Im glad we dont have to worry about it all personally.

[Dahliarw]

I know I recently read a study that came out about the first group of NCLB kids who are now in college and, in general, how horrible they are doing because they lack critical thinking skills and such. This is due to "teaching to the test". I don't have time to google now, but there are a huge number of students who aren't even able to pass a 100 level course in college due to their lack of a good high school (and below that foundational) education. I've even heard college professors say they prefer homeschooled students because they know how to think. There is no question in my mind that this testing focus is hurting our kids and will eventually hurt our economy (when you don't have kids who are prepared to learn at a college level or to think critically, then you have to start looking to other countries to fill skilled positions in the workforce).

 

When I was studying for my masters in education, I interned at a school in a local city that served a very large socio-economically disadvantaged population. There were some good teachers at that school, there were many many many awful teachers. These kids spent all day learning (how to test mostly), with one recess that the teacher's had to supervise because there was no funding for someone else to be hired on to do so. The funding went to "mandatory" after school prep test sessions where they hired outsiders to come in and drill the kids. The kids were drilled during school hours, and after so that the school would not loose federal funding (it was in danger of being labeled a failing school). These kids had no time to play, no time to be creative, it was really, really sad. And most told me school was boring and they didn't like it. If you're teaching kids to not like learning and school, well imagine what that is going to do to the high school dropout rate. And lower graduation rates usually correlate to higher crime, more people on welfare, etc etc. which cost the taxpayer and hurt the overall health of our economy.

 

Sadly, it's not going to get better anytime soon. Which is why my children are/will be homeschooled and I don't have any plans to go teach again in a PS setting.

[Momling]

If you're in a silly, not-easily-offended mood, take a look at this Onion (spoof news) piece on standardized testing.

(Disclaimer: It's teeming with satirical educational jargon and swear words)

 

 

 

 

 

[Lori D.]

So how can us homeschoolers who take the Star or state testing once a year best use the test to help guide us in our homeschooling lessons rather than hinder us? What do you all recommend to avoid using the test dangerously or incorrectly?

 

 

Well, I think it's a great idea to use a test prep booklet for the first year or two of testing, which familiarizes your student with:

- help make the student comfortable with the idea of testing

- the process (i.e., how to carefully transfer your answer to a separate answer sheet and how to properly fill in the bubble)

- test-taking tips (the test prep booklets have great info on what different types of questions are looking for as answers, how to narrow down answers, etc.)

- and a very general idea of the types of questions that will be on the test

 

We used a test prep book for each DS for the first two years they did standardized testing. We would just do 1-2 pages a day (maybe all of 5-10 minutes), about 3x/week, as part of our morning together time schedule. We would start using the test prep booklet in January, and we would just about finish up the booklet along about the end of April when testing took place.

 

If we hit a topic DSs were not familiar with, I would take the cue from them -- if they expressed concern about not having seen that math topic before, then I would cover it with them, and we would do some practice with that math topic for a few days from free online resources or printable worksheets, or from a resource I had sitting on the shelf. If they didn't express concern, we let it pass.

 

So, for us, the test prep booklet became more like yet another of the many supplements to the spines that we would use, helping DSs see various topics from various different points of view.

 

I was also careful to explain to DSs that the tests were more about me than about them -- to show me areas I had forgotten to cover or that we needed to work on. And because I had a perfectionist, I was also careful to explain that standardized tests are written such that there WILL be easy past material, grade level material, and advanced material not yet reached by most students so the scoring can show where in the material the student falls, so to not worry if they had not seen some of the concepts on the test before.

 

As far as how to use the test results to be a help rather than a hinderance: take the results in stride as just one piece of the bigger education picture that you get from watching daily work, through daily school conversations with your child, written or formal output (exercises, spelling practice, writing, quizzes, tests, etc.).

 

For the most part, standardized tests will usually confirm what you, as the teacher, already know or guess -- areas of strength, weakness, or areas not yet covered. If you get an unexpected negative surprise in the scores, do realize that students sometimes mess up filling in the bubbles and if they get off-track early on, it will make every subsequent answer filled in incorrectly as well. So that may mean the student flubbed up in the mechanics of test-taking and nothing more.

 

Also, test scores below 5th grade generally don't "mean" much, as students have such widely-varying abilities and mature in different areas in "spurts" that it doesn't really all start to settle down into a meaningful pattern until about age 10-12.

 

Test scores are probably more valuable when compared over time. So if you have your student tested every year from grade 4 or 5 up until high school, you will have a pretty good picture of trends in your student's strong and weak areas, where your student has improved, or declined, and you can compare that to what materials you used over the years and what was happening in life circumstances.

 

Finally, remember that part of the test score reflects a student's test-taking ability, which has nothing at all to do with intelligence or education. A student's score can be skewed upward (average student but either a good test-taker or a good guesser), or skewed downward (student who just doesn't "get" how to take this type of test, or messes up the bubble-filling). So, again, take test results in stride.

 

 

BEST of luck! Warmly, Lori D.

Basically the test (state testing) has basic math and language art skills that kids need to know anyways. So what is the controversy? I am confused. Someone enlighten me.

 

The problem is that in order to cost-effectively test kids, the tests generally have to be graded by machine, which means the tests need to be bubble-code multiple choice tests. If your school or your teacher's reputation depends solely on these tests, it is easier to teach how to take multiple-choice tests skills than real, deep understanding of the material. Something simple like learning how to blacken a bubble quickly can allow a student to complete one or two more questions in the testing period. Learning how to throw out obviously wrong answers, and make good guesses is another technique. Choosing which questions to answer, and skipping over the hard ones quickly is another technique.

 

There's nothing wrong with defining the sorts of things that, say, a 4th grader should be taught. But, ideally, you'd want to judge how effectively they've learned the material by sitting down and talking with them for a half an hour with opened-ended questions and discussions like "tell me about the American Revolution". Or, writing a paragraph for LA.

[G5052]

I know I recently read a study that came out about the first group of NCLB kids who are now in college and, in general, how horrible they are doing because they lack critical thinking skills and such. This is due to "teaching to the test". I don't have time to google now, but there are a huge number of students who aren't even able to pass a 100 level course in college due to their lack of a good high school (and below that foundational) education. I've even heard college professors say they prefer homeschooled students because they know how to think. There is no question in my mind that this testing focus is hurting our kids and will eventually hurt our economy (when you don't have kids who are prepared to learn at a college level or to think critically, then you have to start looking to other countries to fill skilled positions in the workforce).

 

Oh yes. I've been a community college professor for 14 years now. And this generation of recent graduates is indeed SO different. We constantly talk about this in our faculty meetings and in the faculty lounge. I have a set of assignments over the semester where they have to write a short response (60 words) to a chapter they've read. And among the recent graduates, less than half of them get full credit consistently. I have them give a specific example from what they've read, respond to the example, and use standard written English. Among the older students (30+), it is very rare that they don't get full credit. It definitely keeps me homeschooling...

[garddwr]

I have an example from a friend in Texas. When her daughter was in 3rd grade, her math homework every day was test-prep bubble sheets. The math program for the entire year was "how to pass the state math test at the end of the year". The students were taught lots of tricks and tips for getting the right answer on the test. What they weren't taught was understanding and competency in math. After the test was over there were three weeks left of school. The teacher sent home a letter saying that all the children who could memorize their multiplication facts in the next three weeks could participate in a pizza party. Umm, there are three weeks left in 3rd grade and NOW they tell the kids to go memorize their multiplication facts? Of course there was no time before--they were busy teaching them how to take the tests!

[laughing lioness]

One of the problems that I see is that we have fooled ourselves into thinking that our kids have "memorized" information- you hear that a lot in ed lit- that our kids memorize soooo much today. The reality is that it's short term memorization, stored for the test and then forgotten. True memory work- long term knowing what you know- gives way to short term in hopes of higher test scores. We aren't laying foundations of learning skills, we are laying foundations of how to work an educational system (not that there is zero value in that, but I don't think it should superseded everything else either).

[Walking-Iris]

I have an example from a friend in Texas. When her daughter was in 3rd grade, her math homework every day was test-prep bubble sheets. The math program for the entire year was "how to pass the state math test at the end of the year". The students were taught lots of tricks and tips for getting the right answer on the test. What they weren't taught was understanding and competency in math. After the test was over there were three weeks left of school. The teacher sent home a letter saying that all the children who could memorize their multiplication facts in the next three weeks could participate in a pizza party. Umm, there are three weeks left in 3rd grade and NOW they tell the kids to go memorize their multiplication facts? Of course there was no time before--they were busy teaching them how to take the tests!

 

That sort of reward and punishment mentality is why I homeschool. IMHO you don't learn multiplication because you want some pizza. You learn it for it's own sake. I feel the same way about testing and grades etc.

[happycc]

G5052....

Yes....When I went back to college a few years back there were many students there who couldn't seem to write a decent sentence. When I went to college first time around I had to go to the Writing Clinic with each of my essays because my writing was not very good but when I went back to college the professor said my writing was great. Ummmm...what happened? My writing could not have improved in 10years and I did not spend the last ten years writing essays either. It was spent on changing diapers, doing dishes, mopping floors, watching Blues Clues, going to park days, cleaning up finger painting messes. Plus I was also a single mom homeschooling 3 kids and helping my now husband with his 3 kids. I was dragging six kids all over a college campus and taking biochemistry and microbiology and philosophy etc.

When I read some of the younger generations essays I was shocked. Spelling, punctuation, capitalization, sentence structure, content ---horror.

Then the math skills...I took statistics. I ended being the top student but had I taken that class about ten years earlier, forget it! Oh the whining was ridiculous! They whined and cried about everything. Too much work, too much writing, too much reading etc etc. I thought to myself then why are you even in college if you don't want to do the work. I was not their favorite person as I skewed the class curve.

[Targhee]

 

 

That sort of reward and punishment mentality is why I homeschool. IMHO you don't learn multiplication because you want some pizza. You learn it for it's own sake. I feel the same way about testing and grades etc.

 

I agree that intrinsic motivation is preferable to extrinsic, but some students really can not make the connection between learning their math facts and their future success. I would argue most can not, and those who exhibit intrinsic motivation are often doing it only because they are highly competitive or eager to do what is "right" (they take your word for it being important or they just really are a pleaser). I am not suggesting that pizza is the answer, but with a goal whose benefit is far removed from the child's understanding (like in this case it is hard to make the connection that math facts will help you in later maths, and that in turn will help you solve problems, which in turn will help you be successful as an adult), setting up a reward system of some type is very good. We even see this in adults who are working towards goals (eg If I lose 15 lbs I will buy myself those shoes i have been eyeing. Or, if I improve my sales by 10% this month I will make employee of the month. Etc).

 

I do think that educational time is often wasted teaching to the test. Familiarity with a test format is important. But if continual gains are to be made in testing (ie year to year for individuals) the content must be understood so it can be built upon. Sometimes in teaching that content you will have to set up extrinsic reward systems, though.

[Haiku]

Copied and pasted from an old thread on testing (quoting myself):

 

I am a homeschooler who also has a child in school, and I also used to work as a textbook editor.

 

After NCLB went through, the work I did changed quite a bit. Textbooks (which are already poor learning tools, imo) became test prep manuals. In fact, one project I worked on was a science "curriculum" for 8th grade. The entire "curriculum" consisted of a test prep manual. That's it. That's all the kids were supposed to do for 8th grade science: study the test prep manual.

 

Tara

[kitten18]

If you're in a silly, not-easily-offended mood, take a look at this Onion (spoof news) piece on standardized testing.

(Disclaimer: It's teeming with satirical educational jargon and swear words)

 

 

 

 

 

Ahahhaha, that was awesome. :lol:

[momto2Cs]

I know I recently read a study that came out about the first group of NCLB kids who are now in college and, in general, how horrible they are doing because they lack critical thinking skills and such. This is due to "teaching to the test". I don't have time to google now, but there are a huge number of students who aren't even able to pass a 100 level course in college due to their lack of a good high school (and below that foundational) education. I've even heard college professors say they prefer homeschooled students because they know how to think. There is no question in my mind that this testing focus is hurting our kids and will eventually hurt our economy (when you don't have kids who are prepared to learn at a college level or to think critically, then you have to start looking to other countries to fill skilled positions in the workforce).

 

Oh yes. I've been a community college professor for 14 years now. And this generation of recent graduates is indeed SO different. We constantly talk about this in our faculty meetings and in the faculty lounge. I have a set of assignments over the semester where they have to write a short response (60 words) to a chapter they've read. And among the recent graduates, less than half of them get full credit consistently. I have them give a specific example from what they've read, respond to the example, and use standard written English. Among the older students (30+), it is very rare that they don't get full credit. It definitely keeps me homeschooling...

 

G5052....

Yes....When I went back to college a few years back there were many students there who couldn't seem to write a decent sentence. When I went to college first time around I had to go to the Writing Clinic with each of my essays because my writing was not very good but when I went back to college the professor said my writing was great. Ummmm...what happened? My writing could not have improved in 10years and I did not spend the last ten years writing essays either. It was spent on changing diapers, doing dishes, mopping floors, watching Blues Clues, going to park days, cleaning up finger painting messes. Plus I was also a single mom homeschooling 3 kids and helping my now husband with his 3 kids. I was dragging six kids all over a college campus and taking biochemistry and microbiology and philosophy etc.

When I read some of the younger generations essays I was shocked. Spelling, punctuation, capitalization, sentence structure, content ---horror.

Then the math skills...I took statistics. I ended being the top student but had I taken that class about ten years earlier, forget it! Oh the whining was ridiculous! They whined and cried about everything. Too much work, too much writing, too much reading etc etc. I thought to myself then why are you even in college if you don't want to do the work. I was not their favorite person as I skewed the class curve.

 

I grade essays for a couple of local English professors, and we talk about homeschooling, high school, etc. They are, more or less, horrified by the lack of quality in the writing of high school graduates. The problem is that there simply isn't enough time in a regular, public high school to teach them to actually write AND study for the tests, so much of good writing instruction has fallen by the wayside. It has gotten to the point that many local colleges offer remedial English classes for college freshmen. I grade for one of those classes, so can say, having seen the writing firsthand, that it is a far cry from the type of writing I had to do even in high school and these are high school graduates by and large. The remedial classes are new in the last year, and are very intensive - 2 hours a day, 4 days a week, and these are intended to get them up to a 100 level class.

 

I don't blame the poor public school teachers. Their hands are tied in this. I blame our educational system which is failing today's students.

 

I am currently working on my MA in English Education, and am hoping to work with remedial students like the ones I grade for, since without solid writing skills, they will have difficulty, across the board, in college and beyond. This, among other things, is a primary reason I homeschool as well, since i don't want my kids to reach college with only the ability to take tests well.

[Supertechmom]

I test yearly. I don't even know what is on the test to be able to teach to it. We use the Iowa test. From it, I can tell if my kid is working in subjects way ahead or way behind in comparison with each other. For instance, one year his spelling was like 2nd grade and his math 6th. I then took steps to concentrate on spelling and recognizing misspelled words the next year. I just use the test to see if there seems to be wide gaps between subjects, overall low/high compared to grade level, and if the three R's seem to be getting done. I don't worry about the science or the history because we have a different scope and sequence and many years haven't covered the material on the test for those subjects. But I do try to make sure they seem to get all those little topics in English and math. But truly, the whole community would be better served if we just tried to teach kids to READ,WRITE, ADD and THINK! They could answer the freaking test questions if they actually learned stuff!

[lailasmum]

There is a local primary school here that got caught out teaching to the test and cramming their kids in a fairly extreme way. This was for the sats tests they take at 7 and 11 here. They got caught eventually because the kids were getting really amazing scores whilst there and then when they changed schools and took the tests they were getting lower scores on the same areas which they supposedly shouldnt be able to do. These kids appeared to have been retaining the material long enough to answer the tests but they had no real understanding of it. The headteacher who was behind it all ended up getting fired and now works in a non teaching educational roll.

 

That same school has some other issues, they have an amazing way of getting rid of any kids that have special needs by making their life hell. The place has got a wierd reputatution around here. Appears to be high acheiving so new parents like their ranking but locals with older kids tend to understand that its not quite such a rosy picture.

[Walking-Iris]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/30/us/former-school-chief-in-atlanta-indicted-in-cheating-scandal.html?_r=0

 

And then you read stories like this. $$$ for the school, in bonuses, professional acclaim etc. (Can't terribly blame them when low income schools struggle as it is) This is what I meant above about the reward and punishment mentality. I wasn't talking about simple and innocent motivators. When I first started thinking about the decision to homeschool, one of my first ideas was that school has become too much like a business, a corporation. Tests and govt funding and the webs of bureaucracy and politics have no place in my child's education. I think that motivating a student is fine, reward for a job well done is fine, using some sort of assessment tool to evaluate strengths and weaknesses to help plan for a course of study for a student is fine.

 

I firmly believe that all the problems we see with these tests are due to connecting the scores with $$$.

 

Jonathan Kozol. Highly recommend his books.

[Penelope]

After seeing a couple of the tests at the 3rd through 5th grade level, my objection would be that the tests are pretty basic and generic. There isn't much substance to the whole thing. To me it tests the absolute basic skills or some arbitrary spattering of knowledge/facts.

This.

 

I think it's sad that an elementary classroom wouldn't be able to teach such basic knowledge such that the majority of children could do fine without having to teach anything about the test beforehand. Like when I was in school, back in ancient times. :huh:

[Arcadia]

I think that motivating a student is fine, reward for a job well done is fine, using some sort of assessment tool to evaluate strengths and weaknesses to help plan for a course of study for a student is fine.

 

I firmly believe that all the problems we see with these tests are due to connecting the scores with $$$.

 

 

:iagree:

In my area what is even more crazy is that people want the schools scores to go up by any means so that their property prices will go up. When the neighborhood school's standardized score did not improve as much as hope for, there was a uproar over it. The whole education business is crazy here.