[Winona Online Democracy]
Mr. Holron,
Your comments pertaining to standardized testing are very clear and
succinct. I have been an educator for many years (from preschool through
college level), and am in complete agreement with you. May I have
permission to copy and share your comments with colleagues and politicians?
Joanie Heydt-nelson, WSHS Instructor (History, Psychology, Community
Service - Learning)
[Winona Online Democracy]
> I agree with Paul Olberding and his illustrations are good. My
> point is, why don't we make sure the tests that are given are
> actually measuring what we want them to measure?
This is called validity. What is the validity of current tests?
I don't know. How are current tests validated? I don't know.
Are current tests validated? I sure hope so. A typical approach
is:
1. Pick a group of people considered competent in the subject you
are validating.
2. Have these people take the test
3. Look at how well these people performed on the test.
-----
I have several concerns with standardized testing. I believe
they reduce local control, they dumb down our schools, and they
discriminate against some students.
1. STANDARDIZED TESTS REDUCE LOCAL CONTROL
Right now, the local school board and teachers determine the
content of the district's curriculum. With standardized tests,
the school district must change that content to match whatever
the test examines.
Consider History. We have thousands of years of history, and
only a short time to teach it. My high school History stopped
right after World War II. We never studied Vietnam, McCarthyism,
or the civil rights movement. I went off to college to meet
people who studied all kinds of things that my school never got
around to. What happens if we have a nation-wide test to measure
knowledge of History? Will the federal government dictate what
parts of history are important? What effect will this have on
cultural diversity? What parts of history will we forget?
2. STANDARDIZED TESTS DUMB DOWN OUR SCHOOLS
Standardized tests treat knowledge as information. Knowledge is
SO MUCH MORE than information. The Encyclopedia Britannica is
filled with information, but it is as dumb as a door knob --
literally!
A knowledgeable person knows some trivial details, and can
proficiently apply some algorithms; but a knowledgeable person
also understands the concepts upon which their knowledge is
based. A knowledgeable person sees the weaknesses of those
concepts, can develop hypothesis based on those concepts, and can
articulate those concepts. Articulating an idea is far more
difficult than recognizing a few words on a test.
If a teacher wants to look good, their students must perform well
on the test. There is one simple way to do that: make the
students memorize everything that is likely to show up on the
test (or in a math class, practice the algorithms). This will
take so long, that there will be no time to study concepts,
critique the material, or to have the students articulate their
knowledge. In effect, we will turn our schools into robot
factories; and the test results will prove that all is well...
I could argue that this is already a problem in our schools, but
standardized testing is not going to fix it. Even if the test
results show otherwise.
3. STANDARDIZED TESTS DISCRIMINATE AGAINST SOME STUDENTS
If we require each student to pass a standardized test, the test
will discriminate against some students. Suppose the test has a
validity of 0.90 (which I think is incredibly high). Even in
this case, the test is wrong 10% of the time. Even if a student
retakes the test, it will probably still discriminate against
them (due to the high reliability necessary for a 0.90 validity).
If the test really has a 0.90 validity, and that validity carries
over to colleges or the work force (which I doubt, but for
arguments sake), it will be a highly economic standard for
employers and colleges. If a student failed the test, there is a
90% chance that they are a bad employee or student. So
in effect, the victim of test discrimination will be blacklisted
from economic and educational opportunity.
One could argue that colleges and employers wrongly discriminate
without these tests, and do so on a much larger scale. Even so,
the student is left with no alternative but to pass a test which
repeatedly discriminates against them. Maybe I'm paranoid and
this college/work force criticism makes too many assumptions.
Even so, it leaves me concerned.
SUMMARY
No matter how hard we try, no standardized test will eliminate
problem one. Eliminating problem two would require an expensive
written test with subjective answers, and would increase problem
three. Problem three can never be eliminated, and reducing it
would increase problem two.
On a side note, John Hagelin was the only educator running for
president in the last election. He was also the only candidate
with a sensible education plan. His plan was to reduce class
sizes; and make the Department of Education study and distribute
pedagogical ideas. He specifically would not have used
standardized tests.
----------------
This message was posted to the Winona Online Democracy Project.
Please visit http://onlinedemocracy.winona.org to subscribe or unsubscribe.
Please sign all messages posted to this list with your actual name.
Posting of commercial solicitations is not allowed on this list.
Report problems to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------
This message was posted to the Winona Online Democracy Project.
Please visit http://onlinedemocracy.winona.org to subscribe or unsubscribe.
Please sign all messages posted to this list with your actual name.
Posting of commercial solicitations is not allowed on this list.
Report problems to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
