The Problem with Tests that are not Standardized

Hello Donovans,

There were many good beginnings in our class yesterday. Beginnings to tease through how to better attune to the constant assessment occurring in classrooms, beginnings to be more precise about constantly assessing our own work as educators, and beginnings to discerning more desirable assessment practices. So this essay in today's Washington Post is timely for us.

As you may have noticed, I do not use rubrics in our course. I don't use rubrics because I find that, in the context of a graduate course where I want you to stretch and we are not (yet) trying to demonstrate performance of flat abilities, rubrics create fake increments of ability and also set ceilings of possibilities. Your case study is governed more by 'enabling constraints.' You have to address a few key ideas, and there are some things you can't do (e.g., interview your sister), but beyond those constraints, lots is up to you. You'll also notice that the case study opens up design in ways that those who are proficient at, say, web design, are not pervasively privileged because not everyone has to do the same format. Accounting for that kind of variation strains any rubric, because it is harder to create increments across radically different formats.

Does this mean I never ever use rubrics? No.
Does this mean you shouldn't use rubrics? No.

It means that you should think rigorously about what any kind of assessment can afford, what you can tell about a student's learning from the assessment, and what you can't.

Keep thinking hard about assessments. Start logging, in your mind or maybe even on paper, where and how you see assessment happening through formal and informal conduits.

Discussion Post for: AB, Caroline, Marty, Melody, Steeve

This week's discussion post is to focus on revisiting Oct 23rd's class regarding, types of assessments and the 3 messaging systems in education; pedagogy, curriculum, and assessment. Since the summer, a variety of pedagogy has been introduced to us in order to help formulate our own. Entering our pre-pracs we have gained insight into the curriculum we will be working with for the year. For some of us this is our first time administering assessments, and for others, perfecting the types of assessments we give to our students.

What thoughts do you have around the maliubility of the 3 messaging systems? When is it necessary for an educator to alter pedagogy? What factors should be considered when creating assessments and curriculum? How concrete can any of these three systems be, with how different our students are?

Discussion Post for Paola, Ivette, Emme, Nate, and Bethanne

While interning at my practicum placement and attending graduate educational courses, standardized assessment is a topic that is always discussed. Administrators and teachers are constantly worrying about their students reaching the “proficient” or “advanced” level.  And yes, I have to say that in some ways, knowing that we are reliable for our students scores on these standardized tests is a push for us to become better teachers and apply various methods in our classrooms. However, I have noticed that the stress that comes with standardized testing is always the big elephant in the room either during professionally development meetings or within the classroom. As teachers, we all know that we need to help our students do better on these tests; however, we merely express the stress that comes with knowing that our job depends on them. Others might think that helping our students do well is just as simple as teaching our students, but they are not aware of what that consist of.

As Dianne Ravitch stated in her interview, not all the students are the same. The same standardized tests that worked for one student may have had not worked for another. Each student has a different educational and culture background that might not be reflective within the standardized assessments. 

My Question is, what other types of assessment are best at assessing students growth while taking in their educational and cultural background?

~ Paola

Discussion for Kakas, Carol, Celestina, Erin & Sam: Standardized Standards

In the explicit criticism of common core and standardized testing (related, but not the same thing), I see an implicit reach for another method, a method perhaps more diverse and effective (human, perhaps?). Relating Louis CK’s tweets and Diane Ravitch’s interview, both of their criticisms orbit around the fallacy – and the disastrous results – of the application of homogenized standards and the culture of standardized tests. It is clear we do not live in a homogenized world; paradoxically, some realms celebrate ‘our diversity’ while this same diversity is mobilized as a force of social stratification and active tools of oppression.

Going back to last week’s Allington reading, he covers the complexity of factors that contribute to a students’ ability to develop reading skills at their level.  He found “no research supports the use of core reading programs in fostering reading growth.” Similarly, last week's Knobel article asserts “Standard-setting and benchmarks only seem to make it easier for students to ‘fail’ because ‘literacy’ – or more accurately in such contexts, reading writing and spelling – is constraint to school literacy.” And bringing in Ravitch and Louis CK, their specific criticism of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) adds another texture – and another context – to the debate of the effectiveness of homogenized standards and of testing culture and its tension with our individual realities.

In a setting shaped by “standardized standards,” what are we preparing our students for? What do we prepare ourselves for? In these settings where reaching “standards” is the “end,” what values do we convey? In our lives and our professions, what are we doing and what can we do better?

When Diane Ravitch quipped that we should be teaching students to “think out of the box,” she reminded me of this TED talk my father sent to me a while ago. I realize that we are all very busy and this may not be a viable detour on your schedule this week, but here is a link of the TED talk by a man named Sir Ken Robinson (sir?!), a British man who has some things to say about the state of education in the United States back in 2006. He talks about whether or not schools educate our students out of their creative capacities. It’s somewhat of an investment; it’s about 20 minutes. If you find the time, the audio is all you need: you can listen to it while you make meals or walk to school. And if we have time in our group, I would love to try and integrate this in.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG9CE55wbtY

"Zero-Value Tests"? Common Core Nonsense? Engaging in the assessment debate (discussion post)

Diane Ravitch and Louis CK draw our attention to the purpose of assessment. Ravitch cites two criminal acts: (1) the crime against teachers, who are forced to adopt scripts and surrender their professional autonomies, and (2) the crime against children, who suffer the consequences. The best test is the test that a teacher makes, Ravitch claims. Standardized tests have “zero value,” as they simultaneously feed a capitalist industry and deprive teachers of any useful data/observations to revise their teaching practices.

Do you agree with Ravitch’s assertion that standardized tests have “zero value”? How do these tests alter our conversations about pedagogy and curriculum? (Another way to think about this: how do standardized tests add to our conversations? Detract from them?)

While Ravitch interviews on The Daily Show, Louis CK questions the Common Core, repeatedly, in tweets of 140 characters or less. His followers then retweet, and so the chain continues. Do you view social media (Twitter in this case) as an effective platform for discussion of controversial issues in the education community? Whose voices do we hear? Not hear? How does privilege manifest? What assumptions do we make about literacy as we read commentaries of this form?  

A major message that I heard in Ravitch's interview and Louis CK's commentary on CCSS is that standardized assessments being used to grade teachers or a school are greatly hurting the ability for effective schooling.  I believe that the image below is a proper representation of the most important role of assessment:

But as Ravitch and Louis CK point out, assessment is instead being used to punish teachers and schools.

I believe that the CCSS come from a place of good intention- to ensure that all students are being held to high standards and are being prepared for college, life, and a career.  It has me wondering, what are other ways that we can assess teachers and schools? The reality is that while most teachers strive for success, many of us are still learning and need critical feedback expressing where and how improvement needs to happen.  So if a teacher or a student fails an assessment, how do we plan instruction to support that person?   This entire talk of "teacher accountability" for me translates to teacher blame for not undoing an entire system that sets students up for failure.

We've talked about how frustrating it us to work with high schoolers who seem to have insufficient content knowledge. There is research arguing that holding students back can be harmful to their development. (http://www.du.edu/marsicoinstitute/policy/Does_Retention_Help_Struggling_Learners_No.pdf) So what do we do when a student hasn't mastered grade level standards? What do we do then, to address learning deficits while keeping them on track?

Melissa Harris-Perry tributes George Carter

MHP gave a poignant tribute to George Carter, the young man from NOLA who I was mentioning in class on Thursday. Link here.

And this is happening

The racial terrorism enacted, in part, through schooling, is of course only partially actualized through the three conduits of pedagogy, curriculum, and instruction.

There is also the considerable force of resources, personnel, and what interactions are legitimized.

In the news this week: BPS is considering having school security officers carry pepper spray.

More info here.

Discussion Post for Ivette, Paola, Emme, Bethanne, and Nate

Reading Allington and Knobel, as well as Words Their Way, it is impossible to ignore how corporations and the focus of profit over people have dictated how students are being taught how to read; simultaneously, the reading programs that have been ousted as corrupt and ineffective have systematically kept students at a disadvantage by holding them back from making real progress in their own learning and even restricting them to redundancy in grade level-focused banality.  An especially insightful section of What Really Matters When Working With Struggling Readers reads:  "Nonetheless, fidelity to flawed core reading programs became a goal in too many schools, especially schools serving low-income children. The irony here is that this was done in the name of 'scientifically based, reliable, replicable research.' This is ironic because no research existed then, or exists now, to suggest that maintaining fidelity to a core reading program will provide effective reading lessons."  As educators struggle to fight the damaging effects of No Child Left Behind-mandated programs like Readers First, what are some ways that we can fight an overabundant focus on independent reading, required texts that are too difficult for many of our students, and ineffective strategies such as "round robin" reading?

In I'm Not a Pencil Man, many of us in this cohort have encountered several, if not many, students like Jacques; indeed, his case in the exact opposite of atypical.  I'm sure that we can all readily agree after hearing about Jacques' story in saying that we fear for our students becoming "shunted into intensive remedial programs that would be likely to alienate them even further from school forms of literacy.  In the corporatocracy that we find ourselves living in these days it has fallen on the shoulders of educators at the individual level to fight against nationally mandated testing.  As Professor Patel has stated, this fight is one of the many factors that could contribute to termination of employment in schools that have their agenda propped up by profit.  How far will we be able to get before they stop us in our tracks at these schools?

Words Their Way opened up on an incredibly interesting note with Read's study showing that the way children make sense of words in English as they grow ties in with how English came to grow as a language.  One of the opening pages of the piece that stuck out to me reads:  "Students need hands-on experience comparing and contrasting words by sound so that they can categorize similar sounds and associate them consistently with letters and letter combinations.  This process is the heart of the alphabetic principle."  Moving forward in our practicum experiences, what are some ways that we as educators can help to build on what students do correctly, help out with what students use yet confuse, and be there for them (and help them to discover a growth mindset) when their frustration sets in when spelling concepts become too difficult?

Resistance, Posses, and Pro-Action

H/T to AB who asked me about spaces and organizations where educators are working actively against many of the harmful initiatives, reforms, and agendas found in schools.

As Bree Picower says in her book, Practice what you Teach, "To fulfill your desire to be the best teacher possible, you must teach for justice in the classroom and organize for it in the streets." Picower, one of the founding members of the New York Collective of Radical Educators, also often says that if you are a fantastic teacher for social justice in the classroom, but not pushing for change outside the classroom, you are in danger of merely decorating the prison cell.

Get out, get connected. You may not do this today, this month, or even this academic year, but it is vital for you to connect to other liberatory teachers for many reasons: to sharpen your game, organize for change, and be part of envisioning possible futurities.

Here is an initial, incomplete list of justice oriented organizations who are about it:



Education for Liberation (I am a board member of this organization and would be happy to tell you more about it. We are 1/2 of the folks who produce that fantastic planner you have).

NYCore (mentioned above)

Teach4SJ

Rethinking Schools



paz,
lp.

In Less Academic Language...HUH?

 

Language and power is everywhere! 

This is from my European History class at BC. 

See second to last paragraph.

Talkin White

In a classroom discussion about everyday language and academic language, one young person asked "What is academic language?" Another answered, "The way white people talk."

What do you think of that distinction? 

This recent mainstream article explores it. To read on point research in this area, check out work by Theresa Perry, Geneva Smitherman, and Prudence Carter. 

Discussion Post for Caroline, Melody, Steeve, and A.B.

We have already discussed how the English that has been standardized as academic is a fluke and random choice of those in power.  This version of English is often used to exclude certain minoritized students from opportunities that can serve as gateways into different socioeconomic classes.  We have also discussed how literacy can involve an understanding of widely different kinds of texts.  Knobel (2001) asserts that “Educators need to reflect critically on what learning and expertise is overlooked when pencil-and-paper tests are used to assess a student’s ‘learning,’ in order to be sure that they are not playing into the hands of injustice.” I would like to talk about times when people in the group have felt that a certain test or assessment was not a fair or accurate gauge of their learning.  I would also like to hear the group’s ideas about how to design our own classes so that we can assess learning in ways that are just and give every student an equitable opportunity to share his or her work.  Also, what are some of the practices that allow teachers to realize what their students’ individual strengths are so they can capitalize on those skills to maximize both student learning and engagement?

Discussion Anchor: Benjamin, Danny, Eugene, Hak, and Monika

In his writing “What Really Matters When Working with Struggling Readers,” Richard L. Allington argues that most public schools are wasting precious resources that could be used for helping struggling young readers. He makes a number of points about how entrepreneurial spirit undermines the research-proven methods to have negative effect on students’ reading proficiencies. He also mentions other factors such as not having expert teachers, students being asked to read too difficult texts, students spending too much time on independent reading, and students doing ineffective worksheets that hinder students from being proficient in reading. In addition, Allington also discusses about possible ways to draw necessary funding – by eliminating workbooks, test preps, paraprofessionals from instructional roles, and expenditures for computer-based reading programs – which then can be used to help students be better readers. Do you think his argument is convincing? If you were in a position of power to make decisions, would you completely apply the suggestions that Allington makes? What are possible reasons why many educators are so convinced by the suggested outcome of the entrepreneurial reading products, contrary to the current educational research?