Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] NCLB petition



Actually there are ways to test the thinking level of students. A simple
Piagetian test designed by Anton Lawson (partly cribbed from Shayer) is a
very good indicator of the level of thinking. Then there are simple tests
like the FCI/FMCE... that test the understanding of content. But these
tests are fragile because students can memorize the answers. The high
stakes tests are just basically teacher made tests, and as such have fairly
low validity. So again students can raise scores by just memorizing
material rather than by understanding. Of course the top 5% will gain
understanding do well no matter what test is thrown at them.

A good diagnostic test such as the FCI takes at least 5 years and a lot of
research to create. The high stakes tests are thrown together, and the
states do not have the necessary research staff and time needed to create a
good test every year. Now if the tests were just used as diagnostics, then
they could develop a good one, and keep it secret. In the end a good test
requires more $$$ than they wish to spend. Typically the high stakes tests
are put together by classroom teachers. There are typically no researchers,
and I doubt that good statisticians are hired to do statistical validity.
All one needs to do is look at some of the published old TX tests to see the
reality of this.

That even the threat of these tests changes the style of teaching away from
inquiry to lecture/memorization has been shown. There was a study conducted
at Rice University in Regan HS that spanned a point at which high stakes
testing was threatened. They documented how a good program was sabotaged.
In addition the high stakes testing by emphasizing mile wide, inch deep
coverage encourages shallow teaching.

Most teachers and principals have never been trained in how to teach for
understanding and improve thinking skills. So when threatened they retreat
even further into tried and true, but poor methods. Teachers who teach
outside the conventional mold are threatened with termination. In addition
some districts/schools to keep the teachers on track have mandated that
teachers in a particular subject be lecturing the same page on the same day,
and give the same inane tests. So good teaching is actually suppressed, and
poor teaching is rewarded. Then there are schools that are using totally
scripted lessons. This deskills the teachers and makes the shortage of good
teachers even greater.

The philosophy has been to whip the teachers to produce better results.
This is very similar to whipping factory workers to produce more output. It
doesn't work, and in the end generates resentment which will sabotage the
enterprise. It is a very unintelligent solution, which didn't work in
England, and will not work in the US. Why not retrain the workers, and
restructure the workplace so as to elicit better results? That is a long
term commitment that needs $$$, but high stakes testing is cheap by
comparison. Meahwhile there are plenty of simple things that could help.
Forbid events such as athletic competitions that take students away from
classes. Go to year round schooling, with the same number of days in class,
just spread throughout the year. Mandate minimum time in each class rather
than days of school. These are unpopular with parents!!!! No one thing
will turn around the system, but things can be changed and bit by bit it
could be improved.

Currently the result has been to produce an extremely small effect size gain
in test scores, and to suppress things that could produce a large gain. A
few schools do have teachers trained in superior methods, but it is still a
drop in the bucket, so it does not show up un the charts.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX



Teaching such is not precluded--it is the JOB of the teachers to work on
such along with the basics. The very fact that such cannot be evaluated
IS
part of why it is not strictly part of the uniform assessment, but again,
this IS part of the teacher's responsibility to their students.

12. Applies standards to discrete subjects rather than to larger goals
such as insightful children, vibrant communities, and a healthy
democracy.

When has it ever been different? Few schools AT ANY LEVEL have been able
to
achieve integrated curricula. It is a bit much to expect the public
school
system to do so. Besides, the goals stated above are so nebulus as to
defy
any kind of 'uniform' assessment.


13. Forces schools to adhere to a testing regime, with no provision
for innovating, adapting to social change, encouraging creativity, or
respecting student and community individuality, nuance, and difference.


Again, NCLB doesn't prevent any system doing any of the above with
exception
of the idiotic requirement that special-ed students (especially the
mentally
handicapped) be thrown in with the general student population. But that
is
a requirement that I'm not sure is strictly written into the NCLB. That
such students be included in the assessments IS, but I'm not clear that it
isn't the states that have failed to provide appropriate assessment tools
for these special groups that can be shown to be equivalent (at their
developmental level) to the tools used for the general population.

We bash tests because they aren't OUR tests, but I suspect the vast
majority
of us DO TEST. Until the lawyers and social 'do-gooders' got into the
act,
we seemed resigned to the use of the SAT and ACT as assessment tools for
College entrance. I still think few would be happy with open admission to
our schools of 'higher learning' having seen a lot of complaints from
those
states that have such. The quality of the tests used are a STATE matter,
something that teachers, teacher unions, voters in general should have
some
voice in. The testing is mandated--the exact nature of the testing is
not.
Don't necessarily trash the Feds for deficiencies at your state levels.

Rick [Who DOES want a way to be sure that HS graduates can read, write,
and
do basic math.]

_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l