Monday, February 27, 2006

Since you asked...

A reader emailed me a copy of his article, A Response to Jay Mathews' 'Let's Teach to the Test' from the Real World of Teaching, and asked me what I thought. Honestly, I mostly agree with Mr. Mathews. For starters, I absolutely agree that the phrase "teach to the test" is thrown around without a lot of clarity about what this sort of teaching looks like in real-life.

I work in New York City: trust me, I have seen the bad kind of "teaching to the test." I've read Mr. E's complaints about his school's policy of "all test prep, all the time." Other schools devote certain days of the week, certain periods (ie, homeroom), or certain months exclusively to test prep, that is, to drilling and practicing on sample test questions, to teaching kids techniques which may or may not be useful reading strategies, but which are assuredly good test-taking strategies. I think this kind of "teaching to the test" is awful. It's boring for both students and teachers, it replaces projects that ask the kids to engage with material and take pride in their work, and it is a stop-gap measure that allows schools to avoid punitive policies without necessarily resulting in the kids learning a whole lot that will help them outside of test-land.

That said, I "teach to the test."

There, I've said it. I do.

The test I teach to is the NYS Intermediate Level Science Exam, given in 8th grade.

It's not a perfect test, and god help you if English is not your first language, but I think it can provide a pretty good assessment of what a student has learned in four years of science instruction. It's a mix of multiple choice, constructed response (the test items formerly known as "short answer"), and performance questions. Students analyze diagrams, collect data, explain their thinking, and create graphs. It's a little heavy in terms of breadth of content, but remember, this is supposed to test four years of science instruction.

I think it could help schools assess the quality and rigor of their science programs. I don't think it should be used the exclusive instrument for program evaluation, but it's a useful enough tool. I wouldn't be so desperate to find out my students' scores if I didn't think the test could tell me something about what they learned and what aspects of my teaching were effective.

So, what does "teaching to the test" look like in my classroom?

It means that I'm familiar with the state standards and other documents trying to describe the knowledge and skills possessed by a well-educated individual. It means that I've taken a sample copy of the test itself, to get a sense of what kinds of content and skills my students will need to do well on this test. It means that I've reflected on which of these skills are "test skills" and which are real science or thinking skills. It means that when I sit down to plan my year or a unit or a lesson, I keep all these things in mind, I sequence the content so that one topic builds upon the previous, I integrate the science skills throughout my units. Does it mean that I attempt to hit every topic? Hell, no! Every good teacher knows the importance of making choices about curriculum, what to spend more time on, what to touch on briefly, what to leave out altogether. I firmly believe that, with this test at least (certainly not all!), if I teach the content carefully and in an engaging manner, if I teach thinking and doing skills and provide many chances for practice, and if I throw in a practice test or two and a little review in the last couple of weeks before the test, then come test day, the kids will be fine.

The kids don't need to know 100% of the material in the standards to get a good score. Many of the multiple choice sections ask them to interpret diagrams or graphs; if you've given them a wide variety of diagrams over the years and asked them good questions, they will have the thinking skills to figure out any new ones they see on the test.

And that's why I agree with Jay Mathews on this one:
And if you watched the best teachers at work, as I have many times, you would see them treating the state test as nothing more than another useful guide and motivator, with no significant change in the way they present their lessons.


Matt Lintner, in his response, criticizes the "one-size-fits-all" nature of teaching to the standards:
If, on the other hand, you believe true education is inherently personal, that schools should expose rather than indoctrinate, that there is more than one right way to live; if you value authentic learning over regurgitation and believe self-motivation is the only motivation that truly counts, you’ll resist the one-size-fits-all-or-else fervor that’s hijacked public schooling.

I agree with him that schools - mine included - reward conformity. I'm not a Core Knowledge kind of gal. At the same time, if each of us sat down and made a list of academic things that are important to know, I suspect our lists would be more similar than different. We'd probably include basic math, strong reading and writing skills in a variety of genres, knowledge of our country's history, world history, ancient cultures, some ecology, astronomy, chemistry, physics, and biology (especially human biology), and so on. Some people's lists would include a lot of art and music, others more science or history, but there would be substantial overlap. Knowing these things allows one to participate in the conversation going on around us at all times; this is so-called "cultural capital," something that I am absolutely certain that most parents want for their children. The controversies, which take so much energy, remain at the fringes: this book versus that book, more Egypt or more Maya, evolution versus intelligent design; there are vast territories of agreement. To the extent that a test accurately assesses this body of knowledge, I believe it is fair and useful.

If I sat down to decide what to teach, without the guidance of the standards, I think I'd end up with a pretty similar curriculum to what I design with the help of the standards. But it's a lot easier planning with the aid of these documents.

So, sure, I teach to the test, and it just doesn't seem like that big a deal. I don't feel like I'm selling myself or my students short.

My complaints regarding testing?
  • Too much, too often. Yearly, 2-3 day tests in several subjects are eating days and days from the school year. Enough already. I think three rounds of content area teaching (late elementary school, middle school, and high school) ought to be plenty, with perhaps one additional round of reading testing early in elementary school to help identify kids who are struggling.
  • Mis-use. I am wholly behind the use of such tests by teachers and administrators to help improve their programs. I am not convinced that tests alone should be used to judge whether a school should be shut down or a student held back in 1st grade. It is this mis-use that creates the fear and anxiety which result in test-prep immersion. The test itself doesn't lead to poor teaching; fear takes care of that.
  • Poor quality instruments. Largely as a result of the enormous quantity of testing being done, the tests themselves are getting worse, at least in my limited experience. The ILS exam is pretty good, but there's no way a high quality science test could be given yearly; we'd quickly find ourselves staring down the barrel of facts-only multiple choice.

And that's what I think.

8 Comments:

Blogger the anonymous teacher said...

i love your three closing bullets. they sum up my main concerns with this idea of testing.

i'm teaching at a school where it oftentimes seems as if all administration can see is the test, and i have to keep reminding myself that there are things that are more important. i keep trying to remind them that while tests can be a good thing, they need to look at the whole picture.

i know this isn't exactly what you were trying to say. i'm just tired after a day's work and spilled my thoughts on testing.

9:31 PM  
Blogger Chaz said...

Ms. Frizzle;

A great article. As a high school science teacher I must teach to the test (Regents). In reality, I'm teaching to the curriculum. In my teaching I use enrichment of the subject, historical or present day examples, and graphing. My chapter tests include both multiple choice and short answer responses. Finally, I try to include other subjects into the lesson. To celebrate black history month, I taught a lesson on Polaris as the "Freedom Star" for escaped slaves trying to find safety in the north.

A good teacher does what's necessary to keep the class interested and those teachers who buy into DOE's micromanagement in the classroom program are doomed to failure.

10:53 PM  
Blogger Ms. M said...

**And if you watched the best teachers at work, as I have many times, you would see them treating the state test as nothing more than another useful guide and motivator, with no significant change in the way they present their lessons.**

I totally agree except that in some schools (such as mine) the administration gets in the way of this even being a possibility. One example I can give from my school (and I have to imagine that this is the worst case scenario) is happening at my school right now.

So after the ELA test was over, of course we completely switched gears to math, nath, math, all the time. In grades 6,7 and 8 the classrooms are basically self contained. Teachers teach ELA and social studies (out of license) and the math teacher and science teacher are cluster teachers. Well, with the focus switched to math, our administration decided that the students need more periods of math than the one math teacher can provide so now the "homeroom teachers" are teaching two periods a day of math (straight from the Kaplan book). Yes, they are teaching out of their license areas and yes most of them have pretty much forgot the math they are now supposed to be teaching their kids but apparently that is what is necessary to give kids four periods of math a day.

12:22 AM  
Blogger NYC Educator said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

5:22 PM  
Blogger NYC Educator said...

I agree with much of what you say. However--I'm concerned that there is more to kids than testing reveals.

My own daughter, in fourth grade, only sort of came into herself this year, and started doing well. Had she not done so (that is, performed well on the ELA test)she'd have been removed from the dual-language classroom in which she is thriving, from all accounts.

She'd then have been placed into a group in which I'd prefer not to have seen her, as I think bigger challenges yield bigger results.

She's been taking standardized tests since kindergarten, which I find absurd. Her test results then revealed strong reading talent (she did not know how to read, I assure you), but an utter lack of ability in language skills, which somehow did not include reading.

I very much like your take on things, though. You're very thoughtful and a great teacher, I'd wager.

5:25 PM  
Anonymous Schoolgal said...

Yes I have to agree that since the ELA it's been math, math, math. How else can we teach all the topics they are covering on this test? I remember a time when the tests where given in May. That was a time when I was able to put on 2 performances a year with my class. Now there is no time for any fun activities.

7:24 PM  
Blogger ~lynnie said...

This year I was assigned to teach exit level students that have not passed the ELA exam. Mostly ELL students, with a few struggling kids thrown in. We are required by law to provide extra support for the kids so thus the extra class. At first I rebelled against the idea of literally teaching the test for a whole year. However, I've been able to modify a regular ELA curriculum for the problems that my ELL students have: terminology, reading strategies, writing skills. What I have ended up with is a great class with no "rules" that are created by too much curriculum management. Stressful at times, but really great for taking advantage of those "teachable moments."

Just wanted to throw in my 2 cents.

9:55 PM  
Blogger sexy said...

情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,按摩棒,跳蛋,充氣娃娃,情境坊歡愉用品,情趣用品,情人節禮物,情惑用品性易購,A片,視訊聊天室,視訊,視訊聊天,視訊交友網,免費視訊聊天,聊天室,UT聊天室,免費視訊,視訊交友,免費視訊聊天室

免費A片,AV女優,美女視訊,情色交友,免費AV,色情網站,辣妹視訊,美女交友,色情影片,成人影片,成人網站,A片,H漫,18成人,成人圖片,成人漫畫,情色網,日本A片,免費A片下載,性愛

A片,色情,成人,做愛,情色文學,A片下載,色情遊戲,色情影片,色情聊天室,情色電影,免費視訊,免費視訊聊天,免費視訊聊天室,一葉情貼圖片區,情色,情色視訊,免費成人影片,視訊交友,視訊聊天,視訊聊天室,言情小說,愛情小說,AIO,AV片,A漫,av dvd,聊天室,自拍,情色論壇,視訊美女,AV成人網,色情A片,SEX,成人圖片區

情趣用品,A片,免費A片,AV女優,美女視訊,情色交友,色情網站,免費AV,辣妹視訊,美女交友,色情影片,成人網站,H漫,18成人,成人圖片,成人漫畫,成人影片,情色網


情趣用品,A片,免費A片,日本A片,A片下載,線上A片,成人電影,嘟嘟成人網,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人圖片區,微風成人區,成人文章,成人影城,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,臺灣情色網,色情,情色電影,色情遊戲,嘟嘟情人色網,麗的色遊戲,情色論壇,色情網站,一葉情貼圖片區,做愛,性愛,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,視訊聊天室,視訊交友網,免費視訊聊天,美女交友,做愛影片

av,情趣用品,a片,成人電影,微風成人,嘟嘟成人網,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人圖片區,成人文章,成人影城,愛情公寓,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,色情,寄情築園小遊戲,情色電影,aio,av女優,AV,免費A片,日本a片,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,聊天室,美女交友,成人光碟

情趣用品.A片,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,色情,寄情築園小遊戲,情色電影,色情遊戲,色情網站,聊天室,ut聊天室,豆豆聊天室,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,視訊聊天室,視訊交友網,免費視訊聊天,免費A片,日本a片,a片下載,線上a片,av女優,av,成人電影,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人圖片區,成人文章,成人影城,成人網站,自拍,尋夢園聊天室

1:41 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home