As a student, I loved big assessments like 100 question finals
and the ISATs. I was great at the multiple choice and recognition skills needed
to get pretty good grades on them. I know my experience is different because I used
to hear a lot of moans whenever we had tests. The assessments I took were all
for seeing end results. Bronzo & Simpson
talk about not using assessments as something to do at the end of a lesson but
is another tool for learning. They write, “acquiring information about student learning
does not become an end in itself but is an evolving process of gathering
feedback for the teacher and student so that instruction can become more engaging,
more ties to real world issues and concerns and more personally meaningful (Brozo
& Simpson, 2007 p. 88). These are all points that we bring up in class of
making the class more meaningful and relevant to the students. 
Bronzo & Simpson also talk about how effective assessment
includes the students. Just like how a meaningful and effective lesson is catered
to the different needs of the students, the assessment of that knowledge building
should be changing with it too. This is a point that wants to make away with
standardized testing. There are a lot of things wrong with standardized testing
like the biases and the anxiety built up. It is also a measurement of knowledge
on that day which there are many factors that can dampen how well a student can
do. Bronzo & Simpson cite other authors who talk about this “phenomenon” of
a student doing well on a standardized test and yet still struggle in the classroom.
I have kind of experienced this in class especially in an English class because
I could do well on the tests and have a good grade at the end but the day to day
activities I struggled with. They explain this by saying that, “standardized
tests cannot possibly measure students' background knowledge, their depth of
engagement with the material, their metacognitive awareness, or the strategies
they employ while they read (Conley & Hinchman, 2004; Unrau, 2004 p. 94). Usually
preparation for standardized testing is not all content focused. There are
strategies to answering multiple choice questions that are different from true-false
and open choice. A student does not have to be an expert at the subject to get
a good score on the test. They could just be a good test taker.
I agree that multiple choice tests were the bane of a lot of student's existences. I, like you, would love multiple choice tests such as the ACT (since that is what I took) because no matter what I had a chance of being right. I believe, while it does require a good amount of ability as a test taker, that it gives the students the best chance at succeeding without making it too easy. 4-5 options is very clear to me the best option in taking a test because in True-False questions each person has a 50% chance of getting it right, regardless of prior knowledge. In a fill in the blank test, it is unfair to assume that every student will remember every piece of information the same way. So having a fill in the blank test would only further divide the students by their level of memorization in the class. Multiple choice allows for multiple types of learning to succeed. Students can eliminate wrong answers to make their probability of getting the answer right higher. They can straight up answer correctly because of prior knowledge. Students have countless methods of taking multiple choice tests that help them succeed, while the other tests don't allow for strategies to be built. So while yes I agree that multiple choice tests do not always reflect the knowledge of the student, it does reflect their ability to think on the fly, which, in my opinion, is a necessary life skill. The other testing options you listed are the extremes in both directions and multiple choice is the happy middle between background knowledge and adaptability.
ReplyDeleteSara you write "Bronzo & Simpson cite other authors who talk about this “phenomenon” of a student doing well on a standardized test and yet still struggle in the classroom. ..." and there could be students who do well in class but struggle in the tests.
ReplyDeleteThe other problem with standardized tests (multiple choice vs true false etc) is not that they are easier or harder but that they may not be testing the students fairly. I will present to you an example that has been laid out by Paul Gee in his work on “opportunity to learn” (Gee, 2003). The first paragraph is an example of discipline specific information. The second paragraph lays out the purpose of relating the previous paragraph while trying to engage us in understand why and how other discipline specific knowledge that may be very familiar to us, maybe as dense to other readers as the aforementioned text is to us (or to me as I am not a gaming aficionado).
“Your internal nano-processors keep a very detailed record of your condition, equipment and recent history. You can access this data at any time during play by hitting F1 to get to the Inventory screen or F2 to get to the Goals/Notes screen…(p. 5)”
“This makes perfect sense at a literal level, but that just goes to show how worthless the literal level is…First of all, this passage means nothing real to you if you have no situated idea about what ‘nano-processors’, ‘condition’, ‘equipment’, ‘history’, ‘F1’, ‘Inventory screen’, ‘F2’, ‘…mean in and for playing games like Deus Ex.
“Second, though you know literally what each sentence means, they raise a plethora of questions if you have no situated understandings of this game or games like it. For instance: is the same data (condition, equipment, and history) on both the Inventory screen and the Goals/Notes screen? If so, why is it on two different screens? ... and the questions go on illustrating how important it is to learn this information in an experiential manner i.e. by playing the game on a computer. “ (Gee, 2003, p. 42)
So coming back to my original point on standardized tests; the language used in these tests is not colloquial and some students come into the classroom very familiar with it and others are not. Gee (2003, p. 42) writes “there is much discussion these days about how many children fail in school— [this is because] they cannot handle the progressively more complex demands school language makes on them as they move up in the grades and on to high school” and unless we can bridge this understanding for them, knowing that there are other students who have this knowledge but we cannot pace our instruction on the basis of the students who have this knowledge, which is primarily what happens in high school, because teachers develop their expectations of students from the knowledge demonstrated by others in their class and then consider those lacking this information deficient.
External standardized tests by their very framework cannot be fair because all students have not been given the same opportunities to learn and unless they are being tested on something they have been explicitly taught through multiple means, it cannot be just to test them on it.
Reference
Gee, J. P. (2003). "Opportunity to learn: A language-based perspective on assessment." Assessment in Education 10(1): 27-46.
I'd like to bring up two examples of standardization. First, in the high medieval ages the guilds that functioned in towns went to great lengths to standardize the goods created by their guild members. At times even to the extent of describing exactly how many times a nail could be hit into the sole of a boot (e.g. 5 times, no more, no less). A second example is in the food packaging industry, and how critical it was for a brand to be able to reproduce the exact same flavor in their foods for every single can they make. In both cases these standards were a form of protection for themselves. The guilds wanted to set standard prices and standard items so that everyone in the guild had as much security as the other, no one was allowed to innovate. The food industry wanted to invoke a strong identity and reliability to increase their sales.
ReplyDeleteI bring all this up because I feel that the discussion of standards is a gray subject. There will be plenty of times where you can point to standards being negative, and certainly some where they are positive. I mean, you don't want your doctor to make excuses for the care they provide you by saying that it was loud outside, or they aren't good with reading charts but do fine if they are getting your medical information from a text.
My point is that I personally feel ambivalent about standardized tests. I think that you also have mixed feelings about it, and it is good for us to be aware of it strengths and short-comings.
Although i do agree with the disagreement with standardize testing, there is minor positive of the test. It does give the teachers the very broad-strokes of what a student knows and does not know. But, the main issues with the standardized test is how it is being used. Like you said "Bronzo & Simpson talk about not using assessments as something to do at the end of a lesson but is another tool for learning." Because of the many shortcomings of these big assessments, like anxiety and the inability to measure background knowledge, the question is why do we still use these kinds of assessments as final grades, even in classes as high up as college?
ReplyDeleteHi, Sara.I totally agree that the “phenomenon” of a student doing well on a standardized test and yet still struggle in the classroom. It is normal for many Chinese students who have good performance in English tests but can’t speak English fluently. So, I think, maybe we shouldn’t examine a student’s performance just by standardized test. Their daily performance should also be taken into consideration. The question is how do this kind of assessment equitably, I mean, as a teacher, how to judge a students without personal emotions?
ReplyDeleteI find it interesting how you pointed out that yes, a student does not need to know the subject in all that great of detail to perform well on a standardized test. In my personal experience, I remember that for the ACT, my own English teacher told me that your best bet is to look at the questions before "reading" a passage, skim the actual passage, and then answer the questions. Repeat this for the next four or five passages, and also make sure to not leave any of the questions blank. Even if a student does not properly use these skills, I would even go as far to say that a student may just get lucky. It is crazy to think that the couple of days where testing happens, so much is at stake for public schools. "Get a good night's sleep, and eat breakfast!" would be other lines of advice.
ReplyDeleteI always thought standardized tests should be seen as a growth tool as opposed to an assessment tool for students since all students start at different benchmarks. Not only that, but blame seems to always be put on students when scores do not reach the standards, and I always thought that to be harsh.
there are teachers, administrators, staff, and so many more people involved in a school. Are you telling me that a school failed because of the students, who are a product of the work from those previously listed?
Through all of the education courses I've taken at UIC, the cons of standardized testing just keep being brought up and growing, and I can see why. At this point in education in the US, we are preparing students not to learn but to know how to do well on a test. On top of that, similar to what Daniel was saying in the comments, we are basing how "successful" a school is based off of those tests. But labeling a school a "success" or "failure" has more to do with the No Child Left Behind program that go based off of these scores. This then can lead to a decrease or increase in funding the school gets and even to school closures. The way I see it, it's just this big cycle of messiness that doesn't benefit the students or the community or education.
ReplyDeleteI also think it's unfair to give the same test to every school when some schools that get so much more funding, have better resources and programs and other schools don't even have textbooks or a science lab. Then they wonder why schools who lack the basic resources do so poorly when they're not being funded sufficiently, but are then closed because they're "failing" but are actually being set up to fail.
Thank you for posting this week. I, like you, always did very well on tests growing up. My history courses in school, especially high school, mostly focused on tests as a way to assess learning. Looking back on it I can see why this is such a bad idea and why students struggle with them. I think an important way to properly assess learning is through student choice oriented projects at the end of the semester. This provides some difficulty in and of itself as it then makes the grading process possibly harder, but it allows for student centered choice as well as differing implementations of the project will allow for students to highlight their specific talents. In my senior year English class, our teacher allowed for us to choose between a variety of different assessments, one of which was a test, and graded students accordingly on whatever option they chose and I think this could also be an option.
ReplyDeleteHi Sara,
ReplyDeleteI had a similar experience with standardized tests growing up. I always did well on them without having to try very hard, and it meant a day with no class. That is, if they were multiple choice -- I absolutely dreaded (and still do, but to a lesser extent) timed writing of any kind.
So my position against standardized testing comes not from a place of bad scantron memories but from the way it contributes to the further marginalization of underserved schools and the widening of the achievement gap.
Some people will fight against the phasing out of standardized tests the same way they will fight against any change, but when you really think about it, what purpose do they serve that couldn't be fulfilled by other methods? Specifically, methods that are less biased and more considerate of students as humans.
Sara,
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with that standardized tests fail to engage with all students’ background knowledge and also language demands. When I was learning about the importance of assessment, I kept telling myself: “Why do we even have this standardized tests?” However, I now understand the implications of these tests for schools’ funding, so I think that since these tests are not probably going to be eliminated for a while, educators should not use them as the only or most important tool to measure students’ learning.
Hi Sara,
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing your thoughts and experience with standardized tests. One thing that I found interesting about that section in the Brozo & Simpson chapter was that it discussed not just the limitations (which other commenters have described) but how we can communicate with parents and students so that, at the very least, the results are not quite as confusing. Also important is the communication that other formal and informal assessments in your classroom matter (probably more) in helping students develop in the discipline and in evaluating future placement.
I'm impressed that you loved multiple choice, high stakes test! I guess I'm in the majority when I say I don't like them. However, I don't disagree that taking these sorts of tests takes skill! It is difficult to do well on them. I always appreciated short answer or written response questions because it gave me an opportunity to defend my beliefs. I do agree though that standardized testing is not always the best indicator of student knowledge.
ReplyDeleteThank you for your post! I agree with Bronzo & Simpson's opinion you mentioned that "not using assessments as something to do at the end of a lesson but is another tool for learning". I think the assessment results can provide useful information for teachers and students to improve both teaching and learning process. However, teachers may often pay more attention to evaluate students and ignore reflecting their teaching using assessment results. I think assessment is not for evaluating students and it cannot be used to do that. In addition, as a method of assessment, there is no one test can measure students' all abilities. The test results are limited and can just show some aspects of students' knowledge or skills that are related to the test content. Therefore, the multiple methods are required for assessment.
ReplyDeleteHi, Sara. Thanks for sharing. It’s great what you think of assessments. As a students, I like assessments too. But as a teachers in the future, I don’t like it. Because most of students don’t like the traditional assessment. In China, we usually have a lot of examinations before go to college. And it really takes a lot of times, I actually spent all of my time on examinations. I really hope that my students in the future can do something that they really like. Not preparing for the assessment all the time. This is just my personal opinion.
ReplyDeleteHi Sara. I've always viewed standardized testing as a way for the schools to measure their own students abilities in order to get more funding; that's the cynic in me. But after completing the readings for this week and reading your blog posts, I can see a different perspective. Seeing that there are different types of assessment other than standardized testing is big for me wanting to be a teacher. Especially the part you pointed out the Brozo and Simpson wrote "acquiring information about student learning does not become an end in itself but is an evolving process of gathering feedback for the teacher and student so that instruction can become more engaging, more ties to real world issues and concerns and more personally meaningful." Assessment, like all types of instruction, needs to be student centered. Brozo and Simpson write that students need to be involved in the assessment process. Those who are have a higher level in their behaviors and their performances and products (Cleary & Zimmerman, 2004). I couldn't agree more with this. We need to involved the students with the class as much as possible, including assessments.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the post this week. While reading it, as well as the responses, it became clear to me that we need to distinguish between standards, and standardized tests. Standardized tests, like the Sat are not aimed at testing what students have learned or how well they have understood any of the concepts that underpin our curricula, therefore their useful news in the classroom is minimal at best. They serve a purpose (primarily determining how schools are funded) but that purpose does not align with our aims as teachers. I interpreted Bronzo & Simpson's assertion that assessments should be a learning tool as aligning more closely with the use of standards based assessments. All assessment that we undertake should first and foremost be a learning opportunity for our students. Assessments also should provide us with vital information about the disciplinary standards that are students have mastered or are working toward mastering. If assessments don't inform our instruction why engage with them??
ReplyDeleteThanks for your input Sara. I was just thinking about my experience with observing in a local high school and how they work with assessments. In regard to how they teach the classroom, they are far more interested currently in encouraging the practicing of Disciplinary Skills. in the classroom rather than focus on the content. While the students become specialized in a fewer points of content, and have more experience in how to learn that content, the problem with assessment is apparent. Teachers of course use the projects as a method for assessment, but, when it come time to think about the standardized tests, how will these students do? There is a new shift, at least in what I have seen, where the classroom is focused on methods and disciplinary literacy over content, which does not always seem to bode well if the students are still required to take standardized tests. Any thoughts on this dilemma or have you seen this in your schools too?
ReplyDeleteYou wrote, "They write, “acquiring information about student learning does not become an end in itself but is an evolving process of gathering feedback for the teacher and student so that instruction can become more engaging, more ties to real world issues and concerns and more personally meaningful (Brozo & Simpson, 2007 p. 88). These are all points that we bring up in class of making the class more meaningful and relevant to the students." I completely agree with you and the question I pose to you is how will you do this in your classroom? The Disciplinary Literacy Assessment text said it best, assessment has become a "four-letter word." Tests are not the only form of assessment and as you argue, standardized tests don't necessarily test students on their comprehension. Projects, portfolios, papers and other assignments can be used to analyze students comprehension and growth. I think it also comes to grading as well. To Rick's point a few classes ago, an A in a standards based grading classroom is intended to be that the student goes above and beyond the standards in the classroom and a C is average. How do we truly grade these students? How do we make sure our assessments are fair? How can we ensure our assessments are meeting our students needs and show us that they are learning?
ReplyDelete- Kiley
Delete