Re: The "darkest underbelly" of testing

[aburke5054@aol.com]

  You are confusing testing to inform decisions about improving schools (the testing required by NCLB) with testing to determine students' eligibility for promotion or graduation (NCLB is silent on this). 
 
 Tyrrell was put out because his school was identified as needing to improve services for students with special needs (he doesn't like the fact that NCLB requires states to improve schools where even one subgroup fails to show adequate progress, even though in his school students with special needs comprised 40% of the student body). NCLB requires states to assess their students' mastery of knowledge and skills that the state has identified as essential for reading and math and to intervene in schools where significant numbers of students don't have the knowledge and skills that they should. Tests can be useful for this purpose even if they don’t tell everything about what students know and can do and even if they don’t give a longitudinal look at students’ learning. Tyrrell sees only a downside to this kind of testing and this kind of acccountability. I think there are wonderful upsides - that the testing and improvement requirements of NCLB are simultaneously an affirmation of schools and a magnificent stroke for equity and I think Madeline Will was much closer to the truth about that than Tyrrell was. 
 
 You go on to complain that "standardized" tests do not give a sufficiently broad and deep picture of a child's progress over time. NCLB does in fact require multiple measures and requires score reports that are "interpetive, descriptive, and diagnostic" of students' achievement relative to state standards and that provide sufficient details to help teachers, principals, and parents address students' specific academic needs. It also requires testing in grades 3 through 8 and in one grade in high school. If you feel that the tests your state is using for NCLB purposes do not meet your needs for accuracy and longitudinality (yes, I just made up that word), then you should urge your state to purchase or develop such tests, or get cracking and come up with them yourself.
 
  Art 
  
 -----Original Message-----
 From: pgutpgut@msn.com
 To: arn-l@interversity.org
 Sent: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 8:25 AM
 Subject: Re: [arn-l] The "darkest underbelly" of testing
 
  Art, no one is saying we can't improve education so I don't know why you keep repeating this. The issue is a student's determination of progress, whether they are special ed or not, shouldn't be gauged or determined by a single standardized test. This is the crux of the issue you don't quite seem to get. Even the publishers of the tests themselves caution AGAINST using them to determine pass or fail or graduation eligibility. They suggest a body of evidence be used to determine these sorts of important milestones. 
 
 What's more, standardized tests do not track an individual student's progress longitudinally. Different cohorts of students are compared from year to year because the tests compare this year's third graders (or whatever grade) with last year's students. That's okay for producing a broad picture or for identifying broad trends within a school or district. But that single one-shot test should not be the sole determinant of a child's progress. We should be tracking progress over time. 
 
 No doctor would use a single test to determine a patient's progress. No lawyer would cite a single case law to prove a client's guilt or innocence. No dentist would use the same procedure for every patient. And yet, when we educators cry foul over high-stakes standardized testing as the sole measure of a student's worth, we are told we don't want to be held accountable. Nothing could be further from the truth. What we want is to be able to produce an ACCURATE picture of what students are doing and standardized test fail to do so... 
 
 
 Priscilla Gutierrez 
 Outreach Specialist 
 New Mexico School for the Deaf 
 
 ....change is inevitable, growth is optional... 
 
 
 
 >From: aburke5054@aol.com 
 >Reply-To: arn-l@interversity.org 
 >To: arn-l@interversity.org 
 >Subject: Re: [arn-l] The "darkest underbelly" of testing 
 >Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 10:43:40 -0500 
 > 
 > The teacher said that the school was a "wonderful learning environment" >for special ed students. Cool. What is wrong with making it even more >wonderful? That is what school improvement is all about, isn't it? What >could possibly be the down side to that? Do you really believe that if >people hear that a school needs to be improved to better serve children >with special needs, they automatically assume that the school is a total >failure? That's precisely what the teacher was saying. Mischaracterizing >NCLB and the out-of-touchness that educators are showing in public >discourse about NCLB are going to backfire and reduce their credibility >with the public. 
 > 
 > Madeline Will of the National Down Syndrom Society testified before the >Aspen Commission that NCLB's focus on accountability for subgroups is one >of the best things to have happened for the education of children with >special needs. She specifically urged the Commission to reject >recommendations that would lower standards for special-needs children or >reduce accountability under the banner of "flexibility." I'm sure, though, >that you will just yawn away her thirty years' experience as a mother of a >child with special needs and her leadership role in a national >organization. 
 > 
 > Art 
 > -----Original Message----- 
 > From: pgutpgut@msn.com 
 > To: arn-l@interversity.org 
 > Sent: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 5:41 PM 
 > Subject: Re: [arn-l] The "darkest underbelly" of testing 
 > 
 > Never said that, Art. But again, don't let your selective reading >problems get in the way of any sort of honest dialogue. Just keep repeating >your NCLB mantra as we ALL yawn... 
 > 
 > 
 > Priscilla Gutierrez 
 > Outreach Specialist 
 > New Mexico School for the Deaf 
 > 
 > ...change is inevitable, growth is optional... 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > >From: aburke5054@aol.com 
 > >Reply-To: arn-l@interversity.org 
 > >To: arn-l@interversity.org 
 > >Subject: Re: [arn-l] The "darkest underbelly" of testing 
 > >Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 19:10:23 -0500 
 > > 
 > > How silly of me not to acknowledge that testing is the sole reason that > >kids are not doing well. Perhaps if I yawned as much as you I would have > >the same terrific insights. 
 > > 
 > > Art 
 > > 
 > > -----Original Message----- 
 > > From: pgutpgut@msn.com 
 > > To: arn-l@interversity.org 
 > > Sent: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 2:50 PM 
 > > Subject: Re: [arn-l] The "darkest underbelly" of testing 
 > > 
 > > Uh, Art, as usual you selectively read and digest text. Yawn... 
 > > 
 > > You overlooked the statement that the sped students were doing quite >well >prior to NCLB at the school, and the fact that a single test score >used as >the sole measure of success is the culprit. Many of sped student's >growth >and ability CANNOT be measured on standardized tests, especially >norm >referenced ones wherein the normed population does not match the >testing >population. 
 > > 
 > > You would make a terrific politician. No matter what people say, no > >matter what the truth is, just keep repeating the same mantra and > >eventually people will believe you. Yawn again... 
 > > 
 > > 
 > > 
 > > Priscilla Gutierrez 
 > > Outreach Specialist 
 > > New Mexico School for the Deaf 
 > > 
 > > ....change is inevitable, growth is optional... 
 > > 
 > > 
 > > 
 > > >From: aburke5054@aol.com 
 > > >Reply-To: arn-l@interversity.org 
 > > >To: arn-l@interversity.org 
 > > >Subject: Re: [arn-l] The "darkest underbelly" of testing 
 > > >Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 16:51:39 -0500 
 > > > 
 > > > NCLB says that states should improve their schools unitl all their > > >children are proficient, including poor children, minority children, > > >children with special needs, and children who are just learning English. > > >The teacher quoted below says he teaches at a school where 40 percent >of > >the students have special needs. He's kicking against the fact that >the > >school was identified for improvment because students with special >needs > >did not make adequate yearly progress on the state tests - >claiming that >it >is somehow unfair to the school to identify it as >needing improvement >on >the basis of the achievement of 40 percent of its >students. It >seemingly >never occurs to him that students with special >needs and their >parents >might welcome the benefits that identifying the >school for >improvement is >supposed to bring to them and that figuring out >what to do >to help those >students and how to do it is what school >improvement should >be all about. 
 > > > 
 > > > I think that NCLB, for all its loose ends, is one of the best things > >our >nation has done to promote equity and I think that it is both >terribly >sad >and terribly revealing that educators are fighting it tooth >and nail. >If >anything is going to drive parents and kids to charter >schools, private > >schools, or vouchers it is nonsense like that coming >from Tyrrell and > >people like him. 
 > > > 
 > > > Art 
 > > > 
 > > > -----Original Message----- 
 > > > From: jhorn@monmouth.edu 
 > > > To: arn-l@interversity.org 
 > > > Sent: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 12:26 PM 
 > > > Subject: [arn-l] The "darkest underbelly" of testing 
 > > > 
 > > > In moving toward the negotiating table for reauthorization talks, >Bush 
 > > > 
 > > >and Spellings have shown zero interest in acknowledging the 
 > > > 
 > > >impossibility of children reaching their 100% proficiency target in >math 
 > > > 
 > > >and reading by 2014. To acknowledge reality would require change, and 
 > > > 
 > > >that, in turn, would shake loose the linchpin of the Right's school 
 > > > 
 > > >privatization plan that requires a steady stream of public school 
 > > > 
 > > >failures in order to undercut public support and, thus, get traction >for 
 > > > 
 > > >the voucher and charter alternatives intended for those who don't have >a 
 > > > 
 > > >choice in the matter. 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > >In the meantime, of course, there are the millions of children, >parents, 
 > > > 
 > > >and teachers who are being sacrificed each year in order to attain the 
 > > > 
 > > >assured failure that has been planned for them. The choking canaries >in 
 > > > 
 > > >this dark poisonous mine are, of course, the poor, the disabled, the 
 > > > 
 > > >immigrant, the minority--the ones supposedly for whom the title of >this 
 > > > 
 > > >legislation was stolen from the Children's Defense Fund. No Child Left 
 > > > 
 > > >Behind, indeed. 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > >Here is a commentary from science teacher, Robert Tyrrell, on what is 
 > > > 
 > > >happening to the children at his school, children who are being ground 
 > > > 
 > > >up in this cruel crucible--and what is happening, too, to the >attitudes 
 > > > 
 > > >of the survivors who now see the test failures as the "dumb ones" who 
 > > > 
 > > >stand in the way of success: 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > >Campus West School is a kindergarten through eighth-grade Buffalo >public 
 > > > 
 > > >school that has had a long and proud tradition in its association with 
 > > > 
 > > >Buffalo State College. The staff is highly trained, motivated and 
 > > > 
 > > >constantly involved in professional development. 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > >Our school is a site for training student teachers, with many 
 > > > 
 > > >professionals using our school for educational research. Our scores >for 
 > > > 
 > > >eighth-grade general education students on the 2006 English language 
 > > > 
 > > >arts, math, social studies and science exams are the second- or 
 > > > 
 > > >third-highest in the district for nonselective schools. The scores 
 > > > 
 > > >surpass some suburban schools. 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > >Campus West, however, has been listed as a "school in need of 
 > > > 
 > > >improvement" for a number of years by the State Education Department, >as 
 > > > 
 > > >was reported in The Buffalo News on Jan. 11. How could this happen? 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > >Campus West has, throughout its existence, been a wonderful learning 
 > > > 
 > > >center for special education students. At this time, about 40 percent >of 
 > > > 
 > > >our student body is special-needs students. One part of the No Child 
 > > > 
 > > >Left Behind Act requires special education students to meet the same 
 > > > 
 > > >benchmarks as their counterparts in general education. 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > >A little-known aspect of this policy is that a school can be judged 
 > > > 
 > > >deficient solely on the basis of the Education Department's judgment 
 > > > 
 > > >that special education students are not successful on state >assessments. 
 > > > 
 > > >This indeed is the mechanism by which Campus West was designated as 
 > > > 
 > > >needing improvement. The policy of judging an entire school program by 
 > > > 
 > > >measuring special education student achievement on standardized >testing 
 > > > 
 > > >precipitates much more negative fallout than the simple label implies. 
 > > > 
 > > >First and foremost, parents and community and media people are not >able 
 > > > 
 > > >to see real successes in the school program. 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > >For example, the percentage of Campus West general education students 
 > > > 
 > > >who passed the eighth-grade English language arts test has increased >20 
 > > > 
 > > >percent in the last two years. The eighth-grade general education 
 > > > 
 > > >students of Campus West are almost 25 percent above the city average >on 
 > > > 
 > > >all state tests. 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > >It also undermines the professionalism of special education teachers >who 
 > > > 
 > > >traditionally have judged the success of special education students 
 > > > 
 > > >based on their individual learning plans. 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > >Lastly, and the reason for this explanatory piece, the policy of >judging 
 > > > 
 > > >a school by the success of its special education students on 
 > > > 
 > > >standardized tests affects student responses to their educational 
 > > > 
 > > >program. One bright student, perhaps reflecting her parent's comments, 
 > > > 
 > > >was recently overheard: "Campus West is a "bad' school because we have 
 > > > 
 > > >"dumb' kids taking these [standardized] tests." 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > >Much more could be said, but to me, this statement reflects the >darkest 
 > > > 
 > > >underbelly of the unwarranted use of standardized testing and provides 
 > > > 
 > > >its own commentary. 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > >Robert Tyrrell is a science teacher at Campus West School in Buffalo. 
 > > > 
 > > > 
 > > > >________________________________________________________________________ 
 > > >Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and > >security >tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from >across >the web, >free AOL Mail and more. 
 > > 
 > > 
 > >________________________________________________________________________ 
 > >Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and >security >tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across >the web, >free AOL Mail and more. 
 > 
 > 
 >________________________________________________________________________ 
 >Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security >tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, >free AOL Mail and more. 
 
   
________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL.  Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more.