Many of the comments posted in response to my first post are spot-on; it is up to teachers, parents, elected officials, students and society-as-a-whole to educate our children. It up to those of us who disagree to make our voices heard. But, so as to try and facilitate a discussion regarding testing, I think I need provide some background for those who may need it, regarding how all this testing got started.
At the core of any discussions regarding standardized testing is NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND (NCLB). I thought this would be an appropriate time to provide a summary of NCLB, brought to you with the help of the United States Department of Education (with works cited at the end of this post):
NCLB is a reauthorization (in terms of an amendment) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) signed by Lyndon Johnson in 1965. One prime function of the ESEA was to allocate federal funds to schools for use in implementing programs to improve the academic achievement of children in lower socioeconomic standing. Yet, the money from the government came with criteria regarding the assessment of the programs to ensure their effectiveness (Us Dept. of Educ., Intro).
(Over time, standards-based assessment became more acceptable to some educators as a "reliable" means of assessing student progress; although there has always been a descending opinion regarding its fairness and accuracy.)
In 2002, President George W. Bush signed into law NCLB, touting it as a sweeping reform of the national education system. NCLB is, according to the US Department of Education, "built on four common-sense pillars: accountability for results; an emphasis on doing what works based on scientific research; expanded parental options; and expanded local control and flexibility" (US Dept. of Educ., Intro). Of course the flexibility and accountability are offered within certain guidelines.
This is a summary of the parameters within which school districts must work to ensure they remain in good standing (i.e., receive funding, resources, etc.) with the Federal Government:
Beginning with the 2005-2006 school year, NCLB mandated that all 50 states assess every child's progress, each year between the grades of 3 and 8, and once between the 10th and 12th grades, in both reading and math. Beginning with the 2007-2008 school year, states are also required to provide assessments in science at least once during the 3rd thru 5th grades; 6th thru 9th grades; and 10th thru 12th grades (US Dept. of Educ., Testing).
Meanwhile, these same students are also being tested in mathematics and reading/ language arts in accordance with the Improving America's Schools Act of 1994 (the previous reauthorizing of the ESEA) in which states are required to develop or adopt standards in math and reading/language arts; NCLB required the same be done for science by 2006). The testing schedule for these standards are broken down into three grading periods; testing must
be completed once in grades 3 thru 5; 6 thru 9 and 10 thru 12 (US Dept. of Educ., Testing).
Now, in the midst of all this testing, NCLB also called upon school districts, beginning in the 2002-2003 school year, “to administer tests of English proficiency--to measure oral language, reading and writing skills in English--to all limited English proficient students” (US Dept. of Educ., Testing).
And further still, "Students may still undergo state assessments in other subject areas (i.e., history, geography and writing skills), if and when the state requires it” (US Dept. of Educ., Testing).
As far as further tests are concerned, there may also be testing that is mandated by individual districts to more closely assess student progress.
My opinions regarding NCLB, as a whole, will have to be archived for a different blog; for this blog, I will focus on the "common-sense pillar" of "accountability for results". Although, the fact that the other pillars mentioned above have a tremendous impact on schools cannot be entirely ignored; especially because they are contingent on the outcomes of standardized testing. For now, I will let what I have presented simmer for a bit….
I will finish this post with this: I acknowledge that there must be a standard—and a high one, at that. I firmly believe that if a child has a high standard placed in front of him or her, he or she will reach it…but (and this is where it gets dicey) only with the appropriate resources and support. And this, I believe, is where standardized testing is taking over the classroom—the standards are so high, and yet, the resources (yes, money, but also time, energy, textbooks, smaller classroom sizes, etc…) are not anywhere to be found. The standards are not the problem, it’s the system in which the standards are being quantified that is destroying the notion of an “equal education”. Standardized testing has its place in the education of our children—but certainly not at the forefront.
US Department of Education. Introduction: No Child Left Behind. 19 Jan 2005. 5 March 2009. http://www.ed.gov/nclb/overview/intro/index.html.
US Department of Education. Testing Accountability Frequently Asked Questions. 17 Nov 2004. 5 March 2009. http://www.ed.gov/nclb/accountability/ayp/testing-faq.html#4.
Our Choice
-
A couple months ago amidst the economic turmoil there was a proposed
stimulus package from President Barak Obama and in this package Education
would be rec...
17 years ago
I agree, too- We need to place standards on our kids because they strive to achieve those. Every child has the need for order, discipline, and expectations- as something to work toward, until they're adults and can set their own standards. That makes us responsible for providing not only the guidance, but also the tools and resources. Those can't come from NCLB, because it's much like Western medicine: treats the symptoms, not the problem. Wouldn't it be so much more efficient to offer the amazing resources that teachers are equipped to provide?
ReplyDeleteI agree with you here, regarding NCLB. It was a move toward socialism- a move toward a world where no children are different from other children. If no child is left behind, that also means that no child gets ahead (I know that's not an original thought but where I heard it escapes me). Standardized testing encourages sameness, that is, the same expectations for every student on the same test. This, of course, raises a huge problem. Consider, if you will, this hypothetical situation I just dreamed up: one child in a class is extremely studious, always reading and doing homework, while another has difficulty focusing in class and instead can't wait to get home and play basketball until nightfall. Now when the standardized test comes out at the end of the year, and each is forced (and I mean threatened with suspension) to take it, it only seems logical that the studious young sprat would perform better. Following this logic, we can assume that the other kid, who hates school and doesn't study, scores poorly on the test. Statistically speaking, this creates a balance. That is, one high score and one low score cancel each other out, and create an average somewhere between. Here is where the downfall lies, for the studious, hard working kid may be forced to stay in a school which is not recognized as being overly successful, thus limiting its funding. All the while, this student is excelling, and there are no resources to provide the type of education this person is capable of achieving. Meanwhile, the kid who scored poorly is left there, being spoon-fed more and more information which he finds irrelevant because it is only geared toward higher test scores. Thus, students who are self-motivated and students who are not are lumped into the same category, and given the same test. Ultimately, the goal is to create better students. If that were the case, the focus would be on providing individual attention to individual students, ensuring that they were prepared in terms of life skills to function in society. Instead, we are breeding uniformity. The sameness does no favors for anyone except those in power. If the youth are all thinking in the same ways, they will be much easier to control and manipulate. Individuality and creativity are already on their way out. Just think: every time you hear about school funding being cut, what are always the first classes to go? Art and music. The two most creative things in any high school. The two things which allow students to think outside of the prescribed and actually explore themselves, thus germinating individuality. But individuals cannot be controlled like large groups can. Groupthink must be implemented in order to achieve that, and what better age to start people into the ways of groupthink than when they are adolescents, and the most susceptible to any type of influence. This was done in Nazi Germany. It is being done again. It is important to realize what steps are being taken to implement socialism in our own country. It always starts with the youth, and for two reasons: first, they are the most open to information, and second, they are the future.
ReplyDeleteI will agree with your apparent displeasure at removing art and music (and often PE) from schools when the budget axe falls. I believe in whole-student education. We are not just churning out little robots who know a litany of facts, we are developing human beings who will not only represent us on a national stage but on a global stage, as well.
ReplyDeleteI fear that those in charge are making decisions under the delusion that individualism is not necessary for growth or the attainment of knowledge. They seem to forget that our society throves on the individual talents of its members.
l0lz fail!
ReplyDelete