Re: Cheating on Standardized Tests/Test Misues & User Qualific

[James Powell <powell@NS.NET>]

Monty Neill,

What are the legitimate uses of standardized test?  What useful information can we
obtain from them?  Most district mission and  goals statements include developing
life-long learners and developing students' interests in subject matter. I don't
think our present tests even consider theses kinds of objectives.   I seems that
some kind of uniform criterion referenced tests might be given from time to time
rather than the high stress day each year of standardized testing.  I think
standardized tests have so many negatives  they are now more harmful than they are
helpful.  I have been Director of Testing for a unified school district and as I
looked through the test, it appeared to be similar to trivial pursuit.  Many of the
suggestions for assessment such as student portfolios could be part of an assessment
system and perhaps even some small part standardized testing.  However, the public
wants simplification of reporting of students, teachers, schools , districts, and
states.  Nothing can be more simple nor less well understood than "grade level.,
percentile, standard score, etc.."  Let's get creaative and find a better way to
meet all the different needs for assessment of school performance.

James Powell, Ph.D.
powell@ns.net

Sheri Merriman wrote:

> i, too, would like more information about the manipulation of test scores
> by OHio..I am from Akron, Ohio and have been EXTREMELY frustrated with
> misplaced emphasis on test scores by the media, school system
> administration, and our public officials.  I need more information to arm
> myself.  please inform
>
> On Mon, 28 Sep 1998, Monty Neill wrote:
>
> > Deanna raises several important points that I would like to reply to briefly.
> >
> > First, <<Standardized, multiple-choice tests (and I would say even say
> > constructed response tests) should NOT be used to evaluate school
> > performance--UNLESS that was the intended purpose of the test to begin with.
> > >>
> >
> > The second clause creates an insufficient condition: even if the test is
> > constructed to make a high stakes decision (as indeed some are), the test
> > shouldnot be a sole basis for evaluating students or teachers or schools. I am
> > not sure Deanna disagrees with this, but want to make the point very clear.
> >
> > The National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences has just
> > released a report on high stakes testing (for graduation, promotion, tracking)
> > emphasizing that a test should not be a sole criterion. The joint standards
> > say this also, and it appears will say so in the coming revision.  They both
> > allow some wiggle room: is retaking a test still a sole criterion? FairTest
> > thinks so, I think that is the closest fair interpretation of the NRC report
> > and the Standards, but it is not quite open and shut.  In any event,
> > regardless of NRC or joint standards (or FairTest), this is largely a
> > political battle requiring substantial public education on the issue.
> >
> > Second, it is certainly true that tests are often misused. Riverside
> > explicitly says in their manual that the Iowas should not be used to decide
> > grade promotion (other publishers have similar statements), but Chicago is
> > doing exactly that. In fact, from looking at its purchase form, Riverside
> > requires purchasers to follow appropiate guidelines, and we assume Chicago
> > signed such an agreement. But Riverside does nothing, and Chicago continues to
> > make high stakes decisions based on scores on the ITBS.  It is also true that
> > contstucted response can be misused, and in any case the injunction against
> > using a test as  a sole hurdle or criterion pertains regardless of whether it
> > is a multiple-choice, constructed-response or performance assesment. It would
> > be as true if a teacher had an end-of-course exam which a student had to pass
> > in order to pass the course, thereby discounting all the rest of the work
> > during the year.
> >
> > << Can we do something to ensure teachers and educators have the proper
> > training
> > to administer, interpret and develop tests?  Can we stiffen the requirements
> > for purchase and prevent publishers from selling tests to schools that
> > manipulate test results as was done in Ohio? >>
> >
> > This is important, though I would say it is even more important that we ensure
> > all teachers be good classrom assessors (not just testers), and too few now
> > are as they never were provided the opportunity to learn to be good at
> > assessment.  Aparently more states are requiring students to learn about
> > assessment (tho sometimes that may focus too heavily on interpreting
> > standardized tests), and more schools of education are teaching about many
> > forms of assessment -- but more will need to be done.
> >
> > I am unfamiliar with the Ohio situation and would like to hear more.
> >
> > Finally, I want to emphasize that the problems with tests is a combined
> > problem of the makers, the users and the public that accepts that standardized
> > tests can define learning outcomes and accepts high stakes.  Test makers far
> > too often have a very reductive understanding of the learning process and what
> > students should learn, and the tests end up enforcing that narrow and
> > reductive approach.
> >
> > Monty Neill
> > FairTest
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from the ARN-L list, send command SIGNOFF ARN-L
> > to LISTSERV@LISTS.CUA.EDU.
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the ARN-L list, send command SIGNOFF ARN-L
> to LISTSERV@LISTS.CUA.EDU.
>

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the ARN-L list, send command SIGNOFF ARN-L
to LISTSERV@LISTS.CUA.EDU.