Re: Testing Second Graders

[aburke5054@aol.com]

It is of course important for teachers to use assessments for their own purposes in their classrooms.? (I find incredible the claim that classroom-based assessments meet kids' emotional needs).? But there is more to public education than the day-to-day decisions teachers make in their classrooms -- important as those decisions are and it's clearly important to have assessments that can inform decisions at levels beyond the classroom.? If the second-grade testing program leads the state to develop better second-grade programs, then the testing is worthwhile.? 


 
Art


 

-----Original Message-----
From: George Sheridan <learn@jps.net>
To: ca-resisters@interversity.org
Cc: arn-l@interversity.org
Sent: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 11:05 am
Subject: [arn-l] Testing Second Graders










Today the Sacramento Bee published three letters in response to its editorial 
calling for the continuation of state testing of second graders.

Letters: Second-graders, Sac High, etc.
http://www.sacbee.com/110/story/227258.html
Published Monday, June 18, 2007
Story appeared in METRO section, Page B5



Standardized tests gone too far

Re "A test worth keeping," editorial, June 12: The Bee asserts that without a 
state test, we won't know if students can read until fourth grade. Actually, 
informative, classroom-based assessments can meet the educational and emotional 
needs of young children and enable teachers to communicate more effectively with 
parents.

Most psychologists and educators agree that children in kindergarten and first 
and second grade should not be subjected to rigid standardized testing. 
Potential benefits are few because of the unreliability of the test data.

The National Academy of Sciences warns against overreliance on standardized 
testing, concluding, "Problems of test validity are greatest among young 
children, and there is a greater risk of error when such tests are employed to 
make significant educational decisions about children who are less than 8 years 
old or below grade 3 ... or about their schools."

STAR testing of second-graders wastes hundreds of thousands of hours of 
instructional time for test preparation and administration in classrooms 
throughout the state.

Because of the unreliability of standardized testing at this grade level, and 
because of the wasted instructional time, wasted dollars and harmful effect on 
children caused by these tests, 42 other states have rejected state testing of 
second-graders.

- George Sheridan, Garden Valley


Making reading enjoyable

Preparing for technical, lengthy test format questions takes time away from the 
proactive process of creating an interest in reading. Second-graders do not need 
to be subjected to this kind of intimidating, grueling task that they will 
associate with reading.

Many second-graders are in what educators refer to as the "learning to read" 
stage. They haven't reached the "reading to learn" stage. Teachers in my school 
keep a close look at these students by checking their fluency (speed of 
recognizing words) monthly and giving them a variety of comprehension tests 
related to the current state reading series. The children are moving from 
stories with lots of pictures to the ultimately prestigious chapter books 
without pictures. This requires a big change in their reading instruction.

Beginning readers need a literature diet rich in phonics, teacher read-alouds, 
pleasure and shared reading to nourish their appetite for reading. This requires 
lots of enjoyable reading experiences. The best way to learn how to read is to 
love reading.

- Cindy Sage, Orangevale


A 'black eye' for teachers

Sometimes The Bee just doesn't get it! The second-grade test only shows how a 
particular student fills in bubbles, which is not a math or reading skill. The 
test asks second-graders to sit and focus for long periods of time, which is not 
a math or reading skill.

The Bee gives all teachers a black eye by citing one instance where a teacher 
said one thing while a test said another. Teachers see the students over long 
periods of time. They know what the students are capable of better than a 
developmentally inappropriate test.

As a third-grade teacher I know from experience the second-grade tests are of 
little value.

Give teachers credit for the great and difficult job they do. Don't blame them 
and decide a one-time test is better than daily observation and ongoing 
assessment. No Child Left Behind (as wrong as it has proven to be) doesn't 
require a second-grade test. Why should California?

Oh, by the way, did you mention how much money those stupid tests cost? Remember 
the constant budget woes?

Get it right next time!

- Thomas J. Carroll, Sacramento



 


________________________________________________________________________
AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.