by William J. Mathis
June 25, 2019
The latest release of statewide
test results (the Snapshot) generated some twitchy nerves for this recovering
assessment director. Other people share this uncomfortable ambiguity but the feelings
of people who support and do not support broad-scale testing may be
surprising.
Except for a small number, parents
are the most uncertain. They fear their child will be “below average” which no
parent wants to believe. In fact, parents in states with extensive testing
programs have less trust in schools and government. (1) Individual
test results look very important but end up filed and forgotten until excavated
and culled when the children move out.
Test scores are important but
not as important as other things. Parents care about whether their children are
happy, well-adjusted, get along with others, are honest in their dealings and
whether they grow up to be healthy, caring adults. They want their children to make
sound life decisions and be contributors to society.
Another group of people that do
not care much about test scores is educators. The reason is simple. Standardized tests do not give timely, useful
information. They do not address effort, hard work, or personal attributes. Teachers
will have learned the important things about their students long before last
year’s outdated test results get to them.
A third group that does not care
about testing is students. Tested repeatedly and despite pep talks by teachers,
students are weary of irrelevant tests that do not appear to have any connection
with their life or school.
The fourth group is higher
education. More than 1000 colleges and universities have dropped admissions
tests. Student essays, teacher recommendations, grade point average and student
performance are far more important. Tests of “college and career readiness”
just do not measure college readiness. (2)
In the media, officials say things
like “the test scores show school performance data for every school in the
state.” That’s partially true. If the report had actually addressed the other parts
of the state’s Education Quality Standards (things like individual attention,
health and safety, quality staffing, and transferable skills), then a better
claim could be made for saying we are evaluating a school’s performance. School
performance is more complex than a test score.
Looking at
who does care about standardized test scores, there are a number of Washington
think-tanks that promote test based school reform even though it hasn’t worked
too well. School scores have steadily increased since 1971 (3)
but they have barely moved the needle on closing the achievement gap. (4)
Others want to privatize public schools and they use test scores to claim
public schools are “failing.” Business
groups are among the most consistent public school critics as they want their
work force prepared by the schools even though there is no overall shortage of
STEM workers. (5)
Regarding the media, negative news sells.
A School
Failure or a Social Failure? Finally, and the most dangerous for society, are
the pundits and politicians who find it far easier to blame the schools than to
confront our real problem. SchoolDigger (6), following
the lead of U.S. News and World Report, ranks Vermont schools based on test
scores. Vermont’s top ten scoring high schools have only 24.3% poverty.
Vermont’s ten lowest scoring schools have a 50.8% poverty rate – more than
twice as high.
Poverty has
a far greater influence on test scores than any other factor, including the
schools. . Poverty causes absenteeism,
impaired attention, diminished social skills, lowered motivation and ambition,
and increased depression. It takes little insight to understand that a child
from a drug-influenced and unstable home will be little served by writing
essays and doing math problems.
The state tests will not cure
poverty but curing poverty will improve test scores.
Despite the
limitations of testing, we should retain standardized tests in three grade
levels to provide the outside check and balance that any enterprise needs. This
means negotiating with the federal government about their ineffective and
bureaucratic school reform models. We must also embrace the other purposes and outcomes
of schooling. We must deliver on the central element of our Education Quality
System, our school visitation teams. A society depends upon and draws its
strength from equality and real opportunities for all to succeed. This requires
public schools and a social network designed to serve all students.
William J. Mathis,
Ph.D., Goshen, VT, served as a design consultant for the National Assessment of
Education Progress as well as for numerous states. He now serves as the
Managing Director of the National Education Policy Center. The views expressed
are strictly those of the author.
