Has Your Child Been
Tested?
By Jan Kruse
Across the country there is growing
pressure to require even more standardized testing
in our classrooms. As an elementary teacher in the
Mattoon Unit #2 school district my students (6-7 year
old; first graders) are facing another year of even
more required "district assessments".
Our testing program began in 1995 and
has grown each year. Large sums of money have been
spent in anticipation that our district will be ahead
of the federally mandated "standardized testing"
that seems imminent. With the Bush administration
pushing for tougher standards and more accountability
students will face even more required testing in the
near future. However, as noted by Stan Karp in "Bush
Plan Fails Schools" (Z Magazine, April 2001),
"research demonstrates that the states which
administer the most tests and attach the highest consequences
to them tend to have the weakest education programs."
Our central office has required that
teachers write and administer district tests. Teachers
were paid to create these tests, but many teachers
felt intimidated into writing these local assessments
and now feel intimidated into giving them on a schedule
so frequent that experts on young children would be
appalled.
The tests questions are given via an
overhead screen, so students answers the questions
at the same time and move on at the same pace. Picture
6-7 year olds facing an over head screen, hands gripping
a #2 pencil with a big red eraser on the end, scan-tron
sheet on the desk and the 10-27 question multiple
choice "TEST" begins. We have in the past
been required to have 3 questions for each objective
listed. For example, if the objective is to find out
if a 6-7 year old child can tell the difference between
a map and a globe, we are required to test this objective
in 3 separate questions. Question 1) does this picture
show a map or a globe? Question 2) does this picture
show a map or a globe? Question 3) does this picture
show a map or a globe? By now even 6-7 year olds are
laughing at this ridiculous series of questions with
verysimilar looking pictures of maps and globes.
Most parents are probably not aware
of the amount of class time spent on test preparation
and test administration. This past school year I was
required to test 6 times a year in Science, 6 times
a year is Social Studies, 14 times in Math and this
school year we are adding numerous tests in Language
arts. Not counting the incoming language arts test,
last year I used approximately 50 bubble grid test
forms with my students. For younger children, especially,
much of this time could be better spent doing hands
on activities. Learning by doing and thinking!
Make no mistake, most teachers agree
that testing is necessary and want to know if our
students are learning what is taught. However, at
the primary level more appropriate methods can be
used to see if a child knows the difference between
a map and a globe. The best method would be to observe
the child as they use these materials. Projects that
allow hands on use of material have long been proven
to be a more developmentally appropriate method for
the assessment of young children.
The current required testing situation
began in Mattoon (1995) with the hiring of a curriculum
director placed in charge of developing tests with
teacher input. Teachers were reluctant to write tests
when we already had plenty of assessment tools that
come with our texts. The tests that accompany our
textbooks already measure material that we are required
to teach. But these tests were not good enough since
their use varied accordingto teaching style, and therefore,
vast amounts of data could not be compared through
out the district.
Teachers were using assessments as necessary;
noting variations in class level and individual differences.
We were not, then, all on the same page of the same
unit on the same day. Now we are on a very strict
schedule that allows for little variation. The classes
move on ready or not with little attention paid to
the differences of the students in the various classrooms.
Our curriculum department says that
our students are making too many errors, erasing too
often, omitting questions, and making too many extraneous
marks on these grids. Much to the dismay of the central
office curriculum director, young children get frustrated
with what they consider meaningless bubble grid tests.
Nonetheless, the schedule has been set and "messy
grids", not easily read by machines, do not go
over well when deadlines must be met. And besides,
we are told, having 6-7 year-olds use scan-tron sheets
will assist them later in life when they will be required
to fill out government forms. If it were not so sad
it would seem funny.
The Bush administration along with local
politically motivated demands for higher scores, tougher
standards, and accountability are pushing students
away from meaningful class time learning. As students
spend more time with "bubble grid" testing
there is less time for authentic learning. Students
in the early years of school need opportunities to
investigate and work with real material in the school
setting. As teachers we try our best to offer these
hands on experiences. When we are required to test
in a manner that does not go along with the students
learning, or maturity level, or our own teaching style,
real accountability is lost and actual learning is
not measured. Under the banner that this "test
mania" form of accountability is good, my fear
is that the most vulnerable children will be left
behind. With politicians calling for accountability
in schools it seems we are headed for even more demand
for data, not necessarily for learning.
Parents and teachers should begin to
question these tests and organize to let politicians
and local administrators know that resistance to them
is the most appropriate way to assure quality learning
for our young children.