To teach to the test or trust the child; is the question in today’s education. Over the past twenty years state curriculum standards have changed. Teachers need to make the choice on how to teach the children in their classroom. In today’s society where testing runs the educational world, a teacher must decide how to prepare students for standardized testing.
Although, a teacher may not want to teach to the test their arm is twisted. Since the implementation of No Child Left Behind (NCLB), teachers are forced to teach to the test to try to achieve perfect test scores for 100% of the class. NCLB holds teachers accountable for each child’s scores. So the question arises, should high-stakes testing drive the curriculum?
Preparing Students for Testing
How does a school prepare for high-stakes testing? NCLB was implemented to close the achievement gap between the wealthy and poor. There has been little improvement but there have been many changes in schools to close the gap. According to Berliner (2011), schools have implemented more time in the subject areas of math and English Language Arts (ELA) to increase test scores. Time has been cut from special areas such as, music, art, P.E., and recess to add more time to the “core” subject areas. Schools try to refrain from outside distractions. There are fewer assemblies, celebrations, field trips, etc. Even though these are significant and essential forms of teaching and students can learn from them; they may contain information that is not in the set standards that students will see on the test. This is very evident in my school. It is highly encouraged that we integrate history and ELA to have more time with ELA. In fact, it is one of the goals of our school. Our sp...
... middle of paper ...
...ch other and to challenge their abilities.
Works Cited
Berliner, D. (2011). Rational responses to high takes testing: The case of curriculum narrowing and the harm that follows. In Cambridge Journal of Education, 41(3), pp. 287-302. doi: 10.1080/0305764X.2011.607151
Cole, H., Hulley, K., & Quarles, P. (2009). Does assessment have to drive the curriculum? In Forum on Public Policy: A Journal of the Oxford Round Table. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com.proxy1.ncu.edu/ps/i.do?action=interpret&id=GALE%7CA21668 2645&v=2.1&u=pres1571&it=r&p=AONE&sw=w&authCount=1
Hunkins, F.P. & Ornstein A. C. (2013). Curriculum evaluation. Boston, MA: Pearson, In Curriculum Foundations, Principals, and Issues (239-275).
Noddings, N. (2013). Standardized curriculum and loss of creativity. In Theory into Practice, 52(3), p. 210-215. doi: 10.1080/00405841.2013.804315
The overall purpose of schooling is to advance one’s knowledge and skill base and through standardized testing the belief is that one’s knowledge and skill base can be assessed and analyzed, but what occurs many a times is a teacher's difficulty to expand upon the learning process due to the confinements that testing has on his/hers ability to teach. In a qualitative study performed by the Morehead State University it was determined that in a particular rural school standardized testing had implemented a limit on the amount of time that teachers were able to instruct, as well as limitations on the “instructional resources and the types of assessments teachers employed” (Thomas, 2005). Even if a teacher was content with teaching the state
The reason for high stakes testing in schools was to see where students stood academically. It was made to check on the progress and status of whether teachers and staff were doing their job as they are responsible for a child’s learning. In 2002, George W. Bush passed the No Child Left Behind Act. Each state had to come up with their own testing systems for students to meet certain standards. This was influenced by Red Paige who was superintendent at Houston I.S.D. Accountability was their main goal with this kind of testing. Texas tests are created by Sandy Kress who teamed up with Pearson. The current test outraging the opposed side is the STAAR (State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness) test. Kress came up with this test because people felt that the previous TAKS test was not helping students with college readiness. The STAAR test counts towards 15% of a student’s grade (Blakeslee 126). It is a harder test and Texas is a state with the most exit level exams as it is. Even though people disagree with this test even more, Kress and his followers believe that the test is not failing students, but their teachers are. Defenders can be pretty harsh and blunt about why the STAAR should stay. Bill Hammond made a stat...
Since the U.S. Congress passed the No Child Left Behind program, standardized testing has become the norm for American schools. Under this system, each child attending a school is required to take a standardized test at specific grade points to assess their level of comprehension. Parents, scholars and all stakeholders involved take part in constant discussions over its effectiveness in evaluating students’ comprehension, teachers’ competency and the effects of the test on the education system. Though these tests were put in place to create equality, experts note that they have created more inequality in the classroom. In efforts to explore this issue further, this essay reviews two articles on standardized testing. This essay reviews the sentiments of the authors and their insight into standardized examination. The articles provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that standardized tests are not effective at measuring a teacher’s competency because they do not take into account the school environment and its effect on the students.
Parents and advocates of education can all agree that they want their students to be in the best hands possible in regards to education. They want the best teachers, staffs, and schools to ensure their student’s success. By looking at the score results from standardized testing, teachers can evaluate effectively they are doing their job. On the other side, a proponent for eliminating standardized testing would argue that not all students care passionately about their education and will likely not perform to expectations on the test. However, receiving the numerical data back, teachers can construe the student’s performances and eliminate the outliers of the negligent kids. Teachers can then look at the individual scores and assign those outliers to get the help they need in school. This helps every student getting an equal chance at education. Overall, taking a practice standardized test can let a teacher look at individual questions and scores and interpret what they need to spend more time on teaching. A school also can reap the benefits from standard testing to ensure they are providing the best possible education they can. The school can look at the average scores from a group and hold the teacher accountable for the student’s results on the test. The school can then determine the best course of action to pursuit regarding the teacher’s career at the school. By offering teachers and schools the opportunity to grow and prosper, standardized testing is a benefit for the entire education
High stakes testing does not accurately determine a student’s intelligence. In 1999, the National Academy of Sciences researched the appropriate and inappropriate uses of tests. They agreed that “no single test score can be considered a definitive measure of a student’s knowledge”(http://www.allianceforchildhood.net/news/histakes_test_position_statement.htm).
The National Education Association (NEA) conducted a survey, wherein teachers were asked various questions about the impact standardized testing has had in their classrooms. According to Tim Walker, “Forty-two percent of the surveyed teachers reported that the emphasis on improving standardized test scores had a ‘negative impact’ on their classroom, while only 15 percent said the impact was ‘positive,’” (para.5). According to this survey, fifty-two percent of teachers said that too much time on test prep, with it being estimated that the average teacher spends about thirty percent of class time focused on preparing for the test (Walker para.7). Despite the majority of teachers, the people who see the effects the most, reporting that standardized testing does significant harm to education, the results of the exams are still stressed far too much. It would appear that the stress on standardized testing has taken its toll on the educators, too, as forty-five percent of surveyed teachers reported that they had considered quitting due to the rising importance of standardized testing and their results (Walker para.
Standardized testing has become a dominant element in the education world. It is now used not only to judge a student’s knowledge but to judge the effectiveness of a school system’s teaching. Standardized testing is not an accurate or efficient way to judge a student’s intelligence or a school system’s instructional abilities.
Testing is a way to measure what students have learned from their teachers. Standardized/High-Stakes testing is a tool used to measure the performance of students and the quality of teachers in public school systems. High-Stakes testing is an inaccurate measuring stick of teaching quality and thus is detrimental to the educational system.
William, D., & Thompson, M. (2007). Integrating assessment with instruction: What will it take to
High-stakes testing dates back to around one hundred years ago. They were first created as a means to sort people into groups to where each student could be placed where they could receive the most appropriate level of instruction based on their test scores. These tests were also used for determining what type of vocations the test takers were most suited for. Students began being tested nationwide for reading achievement in the 1960’s, starting with National Assessment of Educational Progress. This assessment was given every four years to students in 4th, 8th, and 12th grade. High-stakes testing began to increase significantly after “A Nation at Risk” was published in 1983 by the National Commission on Excellence in Education. This publication caused a state of panic through its portrayal of the U.S. education system as being significantly inept in preparing students for success in
tests were primarily employed as measures of student achievement that could be reported to parents, and as a means of noting state and district trends (Moon 2) . Teachers paid little attention to these tests, which in turn had little impact on curriculum. However, in the continuing quest for better schools and high achieving students, testing has become a central focus of policy and practice. Standardized tests are tests that attempt to present unbiased material under the same, predetermined conditions and with consistent scoring and interpretation so that students have equal opportunities to give correct answers and receive an accurate assessment. The idea is that these similarities allow the highest degree of certainty in comparing result...
Too much time is being devoted to preparing students for standardized tests. Parents should worry about what schools are sacrificing in order to focus on raising test scores. Schools across the country are cutting back on, or even eliminating programs in the arts, recess for young children, field trips, electives for high school students, class meetings, discussions about current events, the use of literature in the elementary grades, and entire subject areas such as science (if the tests cover only language arts and math) (Kohn Standardized Testing and Its Victims 1).
Cole, H., Hulley, K., & Quarles, P. (2009). Does assessment have to drive the curriculum?
Jacobs, H. H. (1997). Mapping the big picture: Integrating curriculum and assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Through assessment students and teachers are able to determine the level of mastery a student has achieved with standards taught. Both formative and summative assessment should be purposeful and targeted to gain the most accurate data to drive further instruction (Ainsworth, 2010). While this syllabus does a good job of identifying the need for both formal and informal assessments, the way in which this is communicated does not provide enough detail for understanding. Simply listing assessment types does not give any insight into how these assessments fit in the learning process of this course. While some of the assessments mentioned could be common assessments chosen by the school or district to gain insight into the effectiveness of instruction, the inclusion of authentic assessments is most beneficial to students and demonstrates learning in a context closer to that of a work environment (Rovai, 2004). Unfortunately, this particular course, according to this syllabus, relies heavily on quizzes and traditional tests and essays to form the bulk of assessment opportunities. While other activities, such as formative assessments, journaling and discussions are mentioned as possible avenues for scoring, they are given a very low percentage of the overall grade. This shows that they are not valued for their ability to show progression and mastery. If this is indeed the case, this puts the students as a