Do you believe that it is fair for a teacher to lose their jobs due to the scores of their students on standardized state tests? Do you believe that these tests prove what a student has learned in the classroom? Most likely individuals would answer no. They would exclaim that standardized state tests do not prove how well a teacher has taught the material in the classroom. Many people may even be shocked that a teacher would lose their job due to the scores of their student. These tests are not to be taught and supposed to be taken without any prior studying. Teachers are also not supposed to place huge emphasis or make a big deal about these tests nor are they supposed to prepare students for them. Teacher accountability to student test scores has become an issue that is more prevalent in schools today and continues to influence teachers and potentially risk their jobs. Teachers are accountable for the test scores of the students in their classroom. …show more content…
A solution to this problem would be to create many different components that can better evaluate a teacher in her classroom. This would still include state test but not have their component as strong of a factor. Strengths to this solution would include teachers not wrongly losing their jobs, the willingness of students would not affect a teacher as much, and a parent at home who is not aided in their own education would not influence the students of the teacher as much. However, there still are two weaknesses associated with this solution. This would most defiantly require more work from the principles and administration of every school district and could possibly cause disputes over what components should be analyzed in evaluating a teacher. Overall, it does have more strengths than weaknesses and the weaknesses could easily be
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
Despite the view that there is too much standardized testing, a majority of respondents said parents should not excuse their children from tests. A majority also said they think test scores are "somewhat important" in judging the effectiveness of their local schools.
One time I heard a teacher at my old high school tell a new teacher that their job is to teach to the test and nothing else. I did not really know what she meant, but I knew something about what she said sounded very wrong. I thought why are they just teaching us how to pass the test instead of just teaching us what we need to know? Later I found out that whether or not I graduate depends on passing the test. The idea of standardized testing to say whether or not students graduate is a bad one. Not just bad for schools, principals, and teachers, but it can mean the end of a student’s future before it begins. That means not only does schools suffer, but everyone in our communities, states, and country suffers. It used to be that students had to take standardized tests every year. The results of these tests said what school districts would get more money or less money for the next school year. And it would also tell schools and teachers if some students needed to be put into higher level programs such as gifted and talented or advanced placement courses or if they were having problems and should be put in special education.
Standardized tests compare students in different states, districts, and schools. The comparisons lead to “unhealthy competition among the schools” (Pros and Cons 2). In the article, “Pros and Cons of Standardized Testing,” it is stated that “Federal funds are given only to those that perform well” (2). This makes the pressures in schools very high and makes the schools evaluate the performance of the teachers and students constantly. “Low scores can prevent a student from progressing to the next grade level or lead to teacher firings and school closures, while high scores ensure continued federal and local funding and are used to reward teachers and administrators with bonus payments” (Use of Standardized Tests 5). Standardized tests give parents a good idea of how well their students are doing and learning. It also leads to exaggerated reports of success. In Jonathan Pollard’s article he says “Consider this passage taken directly from Kohn’s book:” Then it states how when a test is first administered and scores are low, headlines are bad. Then in a few years the scores go up and the headlines are good. Finally, the scores level off or they substitute a new test and the scores drop. Causing the headlines to be bad again. Kohn then states that “This is not due to a change in the competency of teachers, or level of instruction. This is simply the process of students and teachers acclimating to the tests” (Pollard 4).
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.
Standardized testing assesses students, teachers, and the school itself, which puts a great deal of pressure on the students. High scores show that the school is effective in teaching students, while low test scores make teachers and schools look as though they are not teaching the students properly. This is not always the case. There are teachers who do teach students what they need to know to pass the test, but their students are still unprepared. Although teachers try to improve instruction, student performance is still variable to other factors that the school cannot control.
Districts are starting to close down schools because of low results for the majority of classes. The parents do not know what to do and can not help with this topic anymore since the government has forced almost every school to take these standardized tests. Schools also depend on these tests greatly and are unable to notice the other skills and knowledge the students have. Are these standardized tests really beneficial to the public school system?... ...
Standardized testing is not the best way to measure how well a teacher teaches or how much a student has learned. Schools throughout the United States put their main focus on standardized tests; these examinations put too much pressure on the teachers and students and cause traumatizing events. Standardized testing puts strain on teachers and students causing unhealthy occurrences, Common Core is thrown at teachers with no teaching on how to teach the new way which dampers testing scores for all students, and the American College Test determines whether a child gets into college or not based on what they have learned during high school. Standardized tests are disagreeable; tests should not determine ranking of people.
Standardized tests, and student results in general, are viewed as a reflection of how well a teacher is able to educate their students. So when a student fails, it is the teacher that takes the blame. Perrin recalls being under similar circumstances, even being told that any failure in her room is her fault (53). During my senior year of high school, I had the opportunity to discuss these ideas with my senior english teacher, Mr. Sundling. Since he only teaches seniors, Mr. Sundling does not have to prepare students for any Keystones, but I found that he is still affected by the mentality that comes with these exams. When a student fails, he is still held accountable for their lack of success. Even teachers that are not a part of the standardized testing system are still pressured by schools to make sure students are producing high quality results. I remember how Mr. Sundling expressed his anger towards a system that makes him take the blame for a student’s failure. Perrin describes how frustrating this can be by comparing it to a scenario where a doctor is blamed for not being able to cure a teenager’s ailment, even though the doctor had done his job, and it was the teenager that had failed to listen (52). Students are able to escape failure by making the teacher look at fault. Mr. Sundling only wanted us to succeed, but when the occasional failure did slip through, he was the one being held
Many people agree that standardized tests are a reasonable evaluation of a student’s capability. Standardized tests originated in the mid-1800s, in the American education system. W. James Popham defines standardized testing by “any test that’s administered, scored, and interpreted in a standard, predetermined manner” (“Is the Use of…,” 2013). After the No Child Left behind Act (NCLB) came about in the early 2000s, the use of standardized testing became popular. NCLB required yearly testing for specific grades and subjects. If schools did not demonstrate adequate improvement, they were either closed or run by the state. This was done so the state and the tax payers of the schools knew that students were learning and knowing the material. Tax payers especially wanted to make sure their money was going to good use (“Is the Use of…,” 2013). High scores on standardized tests can result in funding for the school, along with bonuses to the facility and staff of the school.
Politicians claim that Accountability is needed. Dylan Wiliam wrote that “The logic of accountability is deceptively simple”(110) He goes on to say that “students attending higher quality schools will (by definition) have higher achievement than those attending lower quality schools, so that the differences in quality of schools will result in systematic differences in achievement between schools”(110). Yes indeed accountability is needed. It is needed for those who pay for education (tax payers) and the people who are educated (the students). The institutions that regulate education should be held accountable for the policies they enact as well as the government that approved those actions. “Of the total variance in mathematics achievement of 15-year-olds in the United States in 2004 only 8% was attributable to the actual quality of the education provided by the school, the results in science are similar” (111). This is an indictment of the American school system, it points out that standardized testing is in fact inaccurate and unnecessary.
For students to be able to do well on standardized test they rely on their teachers. Several teachers interviewed said they spent hours of extra planning time and hundreds of dollars to create more interesting lessons. They said they must be supremely organized and strict enforcers of classroom rules. (Watanabe). Some teachers are pressured to the point that they make education all about the test and up to the test. The pressure to improve students test performance in California and across the country often meets with disdain from teachers who say they are compelled to throw out creativity and “teach to the test.” (Watanabe). If somehow the test were based on what students learn, then students could score better. Educators are unanimous that high-stakes test should be aligned with curriculum and instruction-taught and are expected to know – and that teachers should be involved in the process. (Nina and Sol Hurwitz). Teachers should continue to teach to the test, standardized test will end up being a simple exam in which every student should find it easy to take. If high-stake tests adequately cover the essential material to be learned in each grade, these practices can enhance the teaching in the classroom. Teaching to a well-designed set of tests can improve both test scores and student achievements. (Crone). Even
As a student, I work very hard for the test grades that I receive. Therefore, I do not think it is right for an educator to change or alter a standardized test score in any way. In doing so, altering test scores can negatively affect many children’s lives in many different ways. I also believe that an educator should face consequences for the cheating crimes that they have committed. Furthermore, these teachers should be setting good examples for the students in the school, not committing crimes that effect the students.
The state’s new evaluation system was in response to administrators who produced, “superficial and capricious teacher evaluation systems that often don't even directly address the quality of instruction, much less measure students' learning” (Toch, 2008). Too often, the “good-ol-boy” attitude would insure mediocre educators would remain employed. Realizing this was often more the rule then the exception, the governor created educational mandates to focus, “on supporting and training effective teachers to drive student achievement” (Marzano Center, 2013). Initially, they expected the school districts and the teachers would have issues and experience growing pains, but in the end the goal was, “to improve teacher performance, year by year, with a corresponding rise in student achievement” (Marzano Center, 2013).
In order to understand how teacher evaluations can be positive, we need to look at their purpose and how districts do teachers evaluations. According to different articles written by Education Leadership, reformers many times neglect teacher evaluations as a tool to improve student learning, this is because most schools lack credible systems of measuring the quality of