A discussion about standards, state testing, and standards-based
classrooms began when our Canadian friend Brenda Dyck wrote:
Here's an opportunity for us to be a fly on the wall for an online conversation
with Alfie Kohn, Author of "The Case Against Standardized Testing".
Mr. Kohn, prolific author and advocate, will appear online with Teachers.Net
on this Thursday, October 26, 9:00-10:00 pm Eastern Time in the Conference
Room http://teachers.net/conference.
Alfie Kohn warns, "Every hour spent getting students to be better test
takers is an hour not spent helping them to think like historians or scientists.
The result is that the demands to raise standards are responsible for dumbing
down our schools."
The Alfie Kohn chat will be archived at http://teachers.net/archive
.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Does anyone have any resources or statistics on test scores and the effectiveness
of teachers? In other words, Does the teacher really matter when it comes
to standardized tests?
Jeff Kash
--------------------------------------------------------------
I was told yes, and that test scores generally go up after the fourth year.
(I've got one more to go.) Actually, I can feel my guys accelerating as
we speak, given a new perspective and a lot of professional development.
Further, I've found the most valuable thing to be looking at student work
with a like minded colleague (we both teach reading) to see what they are
actually doing when they read. This concept was beyond me before. I think
my guys'll go up this year. I've improved alot.
Charles Norman
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't object to us trying to raise the standards, but yet I would like
some legislatures to come and sit in the classes for about a month. A day
or two would not do anything... a week might be ok... but a month would
be great. Then I would like to see them teach classes and inspire the students
to get their work in on time and do the best they can.
Avis Breding
To which Avis added, in another message:
Someone asked our two presenters on state standards today, "are we
not teaching to the test? (state or CTBS)." They said no, you are teaching
to the state standards.... We said, same thing.
The point that nobody seems to be hearing or seeing... is that as long as
we are just teaching to the standards... we really haven't changed. But
then the presenters said... but it is how you teach to the standards that
counts. That brings in hands on, games, manipulatives, centers etc.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Which provoked John Norton into this lengthy response:
Avis...
One of the problems with the "standards movement," I think, is
that the advocates of standards-based classrooms have lost control of their
message, as high-stakes state testing advocates have seized the "standards"
language -- tacking it on to the state accountability system without sufficient
thought and certainly without the major investment in professional development
required to make standards a meaningful tool to raise student achievement.
I've had the opportunity to observe standards-based classrooms where teachers
are improving teaching and learning through the use of standards. In every
case, the standards were developed or modified by the school system, with
active teacher participation, and were accompanied by "performance
standards" that showed teachers and students what is "good enough."
The standards-based initiative was accompanied by lots of professional development
that linked standards to teaching practice, classroom assessment, etc.
In these classrooms and schools, the decision to measure student progress
against standards provoked deep conversations about the quality of lessons
and teaching strategies, about the meaning of grades, and about the need
to deepen content. Also, in every case, teachers were using all of the creative
teaching strategies that teachers on this listserv advocate.
Even with all this help, grasping and applying the standards-based approach
to teaching and learning is very hard work. But in many dozens of interviews
with teachers in these schools, I heard over and over again that the standards-based
approach to teaching was improving the curriculum, reducing duplicative
teaching across grades in every subject area, and causing teachers to ask
some difficult but important questions about the value of favorite projects
that kids enjoyed but that did little to increase their skills and knowledge.
In many cases, the process of examining lessons from a standards perspective
made it possible for teachers to modify those "favorite units",
retaining the fun and excitement while strengthening the academic purpose
and the learning outcomes. [None of this has an impact unless teachers move
beyond the point of simply trying to "match" a list of standards
to their existing lesson plans.]
I know there are teachers on this listserv who have experienced the positives
of standards-based teaching -- and I hope they'll talk about it. Alas, in
some of their schools, the growing pressure to perform on standardized state
tests has actually stymied the move toward standards-based teaching, as
principals and teachers have given in (understandably) to pressure from
above to drill, drill, drill -- to narrow curriculum and make the state
test the Alpha and Omega of schooling.
One of MiddleWeb's "partner" organizations, the Focused Reporting
Project, has written about successful standards-based
teaching in schools in Long Beach and Louisville. I'd be happy to mail copies
of these stories to anyone on the list who would like to have them. Send
me a private e-mail and include
your postal mailing address.
Also, the Education Trust's "Standards
in Practice" professional development program is worth taking a
look at. As its literature states, it's a strategy "to ensure that
classroom activities are aligned with standards (and) can be used to evaluate
classroom assignments, projects, courses, curricula, and teachers' and administrators'
performances."
I don't believe the excellent teachers on this list are afraid to ask tough
questions about their own teaching and the teaching in their schools. That's
what standards should be all about. Unfortunately, politicians and other
folks who seek to gain an advantage by leveling blanket attacks on educators,
without much clue about the realities of school, are turning the standards
movement into a bludgeon. That's a dead-end strategy that won't help teachers,
schools, or most important of all, kids.
Please forgive my long diatribe. I wanted to make the point that it is possible
to agree with Kohn about the negative effects of high-stakes testing, support
constructivist teaching, and still believe that standards-based teaching
can raise student achievement.
John Norton
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have seen great strides in students demonstrating and talking about mathematical
understanding as a result of standards-based teaching. My classes use creative
assignments, mostly manipulatives & real life problems, to create a
NEED for understanding skills. When students are faced with an interesting,
important task, and they realize that they need to know how to divide fractions
to complete their task, they are much more willing to listen to the mini-lesson
on fractions (for the 3rd year in a row).... and they actually remember
the skills. Through the use of carefully selected activities, one can motivate
students to desire mathematical skills... on all academic levels.
Greata Heady
Louisville
----------------------------------------------------------------------
After reading John's response, I wanted to add my two cents in about standards
and testing. I fully agree that standards can raise the bar of what we expect
students to achieve. This is only my fourth year teaching, and I know that
the combination of state and district standards along with a state reading
and writing test (the CSAP in Colorado) have forced me to really think about
and "dig deep" about my teaching practices. The standards have
been extremely helpful as a novice teacher.
BUT, I have fallen victim to being so focused on the state test and having
my students score highly on it (with pressure from administration) that
I lose sight of the joy of learning and what will really help students when
they leave my classroom and the school system. I think there is a delicate
balance between preparing students to write, think, and read well for the
world while also making sure those things transfer to performing well on
the state tests.
Amy Heinsma
7th Grade Language Arts and Reading Teacher
Windsor, Colorado
--------------------------------------------------------------
And Avis Breding replied:
John... I agree in whole with what you said... and will answer a couple
of comments! The point that I agree with our presenters is, * it matters
HOW you you teach your students to reach the goal*, so that of course started
my wild global thinking again......
> I've had the opportunity to observe standards-based classrooms where
> teachers are improving teaching and learning through the use of
> standards.
Our training is coming out of Texas, which is a state that has worked on
their standards for 3 years, and their scores climbed up quite nicely. So
that is where we are taking our cue.
> I heard over and over again that the standards-based approach to
>teaching was improving the curriculum, reducing duplicative teaching
>across grades in every subject area,
I believe this... as we had our inservice yesterday on state standards...
and found how certain areas were being taught over and over. Our findings
will affect how our state standards will be rewritten. Duplication will
disappear.
You also wrote:
< [None of this has an impact unless teachers move beyond the point of
simply trying to "match" a list of < standards to their existing
lesson plans.]
Agree... THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX ! That is our principal's motto.
> believe that standards-based teaching can raise student achievement.
I think they can... because they give us a goal to aim at... rather than
finish the book! It is a growing process!
Avis
--------------------------------------------------------------
I agree with John Norton that we can have standards based teaching without
mindless skill and drill to raise test scores. My questions are about things
like who gets to set the standards and for what purpose?
Are we testing in order to refine instruction and support high quality,
universal education, or are we still just sorting kids and leaving larger
and larger numbers of them behind? In my experience, most of the standards
seem to make sense and I think most good teachers are already incorporating
them into their classes and lessons.
I think we need to champion our own efforts and make our thinking and practice
public. I think we need to engage our kids and their families in conversations
about the standards that they think are important...we can't let people,
who have demonstrated their lack of concern for our children, continue to
set the stage for this debate.
Deb Bambino
--------------------------------------------------------------
I certainly agree that standards-based teaching is hard work. It is a major
change in approach. I was one of the lucky ones who has been in on the professional
development since the beginning of standards work. Our school was one of
the original New American Schools.
Although this is difficult work I would not go back to my earlier methods
and ideas about teaching. I have watched the changes in myself and in the
learning of my students. We use our state standards as a framework but we
develop our own standards for each particular unit. My students have an
active part in setting the standards.
And then there is figuring out which standards are being addressed and which
standards you really mean to assess in this unit.
I have also seen the teaching of science change/improve dramatically at
the elementary level through the use of published standards based kits or
units. I have seen one school in particular go from teaching absolutely
no science in k-5 (well maybe dinosaurs) to teaching pretty good science.
I have watched the change in my own students as they become clear on what
the expectations for them are in each subject area. We most often develop
rubrics together. This takes a lot of time but it is time well spent.
But I also agree with John that all of this testing is more than a bit much!
It is also very difficult in a small school to gather & use results
from these tests to base important decisions on regarding programming etc.
when the sample size is often no more than 10 kids. Try making parents understand
that. Try getting them to understand that one child can rally skew the information.
I believe we should be accountable but high stakes testing is not the way
to go!
Enough of a diatribe from the Vermont contingent
Kathy Renfrew
--------------------------------------------------------------
Deborah Bambino wrote:
> I agree with John Norton that we can have standards based teaching
without > mindless skill and drill to > raise test scores. My questions
are about things like who gets to set the standards and for what purpose?
Well put, Deb! I had a conversation with one of my parents yesterday about
this - we talked about the kind of writing instruction she wants her son
to receive from my language arts teachers - just read the article in the
newest Middle Ground magazine which also speaks to your thoughts. The latest
issue also has an excellent article on reviewing student work.
Betsy Burch
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Deb raises some important questions. I think there are two debates here.
One is how standards are set -- who gets to decide what's important? The
second issue, which is equally important, is, "if we don't create standards
and benchmarks, how do we know we are effective, and what we need to change
or refine?" It's an "us", not a "me" issue. It's
about the work of the whole school.
I don't think standards have to be linked to high-stakes tests to be effective
in improving teaching and learning. In fact, I'd be happy to see that practice
end. What I'm convinced of is that teachers, teams, depts. and schools who
can agree on "what we want to teach and how we'll know if kids have
learned it (and/or if we taught it well)" will begin a journey of discovery
that will lead schools to higher levels of achievement.
John Norton
--------------------------------------------------------------
Hi All,
This was one of those days when I did not skim the letters in the digest.
Instead I thoroughly read each new letter. Since I am a first- year teacher
in a district that is standards oriented and a state that has embraced standardized
tests, I was intrigued by the responses that were on the listserv.
As a big fan of standards, and a cynic who has no choice but to condone
standardized tests, I now consider them two separate issues that have somehow
managed to be connected by school boards and the press.
The standards issue is one that I have come to cherish, since it means that
academics are a priority in my school. Additionally, the standards based
learning still leaves me with plenty of autonomy and opportunities to use
my creativity (when I can muster it up). My district gives workshops on
its standards, and supervisors and chairpersons observe, evaluate, and share
their knowledge. I have learned so much during the past two months because
of these standards.
The standardized tests, however, are what make teachers turn into prefabs.
Some of these tests our students have to take require a certain amount of
'training' as do the SAT and the GRE. When I review practice tests with
my students, I often find myself telling my kids, "The people who wrote
this question are looking for this answer." Additionally, some testing
items are poorly written and have answers that confuse me. Some testing
features, moreover, are completely inane.
Perhaps what politicians, boards of ed., and the like do not realize is
that the tests our kids are taking conflict with the standards movement.
ETS, on their path to proving that standardized tests and standards-based
education are related, are pulling in lots of $$$ and are making weak connections
which the general public is so apt to believe.
Anyway (whew!), how can we educators illustrate this to parents, teachers,
politicians, and all those other folks????? I want to know, especially because
these tests can cost some of us our jobs!!
Stacy Goldberger
--------------------------------------------------------------
This is interesting. I am not a fan of high stakes testing, however I am
a fan of standards-based instruction. Simply put, haven't we always "taught
to the test?" Think about it before you jump! You decide what body
of knowledge you want your students to know. You teach it to them. You give
them lots and lots of different experiences using the material. Then, you
assess them. What is the difference?
The difference is that (in most states) a group of educators has decided
a scope and sequence for us to teach only now we call them "standards".
They called them "standards" for a reason. Think about a "standard
car" a "standard student" a "standard gasoline".
In each case the word "standard" means a baseline with lots of
room to grow.
Another plus as I see it is that (again, in most states) a group of educators
has written the standards I am expected to teach. It used to be a textbook
company -- back in the days when teachers "taught the book." Now
teachers are driving what is taught. I have taught in three states that
have "standards." Most are rich and rigorous in content.
As a parent, I am sure that a particular body of knowledge is being taught
to my children. As a teacher, I want to be regarded as a professional. I
want the hard work that is done in classrooms to be recognized publicly.
I want my students to be "above standard." I'm hoping that having
standards will get us there!
Mary Anne Kosmoski
--------------------------------------------------------------
Hi All,
As I continue my thinking about standards I am considering how we can make
good use of high standards. With that end in mind, I picked up my copy of
"The
Heart of the Matter: Using Standards and Assessments to Learn"
by Beverly Falk. (Also see her article, "Teaching
the Way Children Learn.")
In the beginning of her book, Ms. Falk puts forward some questions that
I thought we might be able to use to frame our ongoing discussion here.
She asks the following:
* How to define standards that are worthy...?
* How to make worthy standards explicit and meaningful in teacher and school
developed curricula?
* How to create performance assessments that embody these standards to inform
teaching?
* How to use standards and performance assessments to enhance professional
learning?
As I read further, I expect to learn how Ms.Falk has worked collaboratively
with her peers, students and their families to begin addressing these aspects
of the standards debate.
I hope we can use these questions to dig deeper into the issue of standards
and our teaching and learning. Are there other questions we need to consider?
Shall we start with the first one?
Deb Bambino
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Our standards movement began in 1990 in Kentucky. Although we sometimes
gnash our teeth at the change still needed, it has been good for our schools.
Four years ago, Barren County Middle School had many mandates because we
ranked 141 among all 336 schools testing middle grades in Kentucky. We began
searching and began to try many things. Just this year, when our test scores
came back, we ranked 26 out of those schools.
I would attribute our success to many things. First a wholistic, not a shot-gun
approach to all our needs in instruction. Second, involving the students
in making choices and in understanding what the assessment meant. Third,
the embracing (by most of our faculty) in the Different
Ways of Knowing initiative by the Galef Institute has probably been
the biggest change agent. It is constructivist in nature, arts-infused,
it honors the multiple intelligences, is interdisciplinary in design, has
on-going assessments, and creates a community of learners. Although it has
been a typically elementary level program, it truly changed the level of
rigor in our school. Currently, Galef is designing a true middle school
model and will be piloting schools soon. If you want more information about
this, go to http://www.dwoknet.org.
We also re-aligned our schedule and developed a remedial reading course
for those 50 seventh graders, consistently, that we receive each year reading
below the fifth grade level.
We expected teachers to dialogue around student work associated with the
goals we decided through our School-Based Decision-Making Council. We expected
teams to plan interdisciplinary instruction around broad concepts and to
be consistent with learning processes across disciplines.
Finally, we tried to keep the "developmental responsiveness" end
and the "social equity" piece threaded through all our work. We
looked to our business community to help, and we now have 36 community business
partners. We also got a 21st Century Community Learning Center grant to
focuses on transition and parent involvement as well a reading and science
skills.
Yes, it was all hard work, but our school is a better place because of it.
Michelle Pedigo Glasgow, KY
--------------------------------------------------------------
California principal Betsy Burch wrote this in response to a Pennsylvania
principal's concern about the poor alignment between state standards and
state tests.
Given the current political environment in most of our states, we must simply
do the best we can with the test data that our respective states select.
In our state, we also are able to give district-selected pre and post assessment
tests in the areas of reading, math and writing, with a science assessment
to be developed later this year. We compare the results of the pre/post
assessments with the individual student outcomes on the SAT-9 (the state
selected test) and we then have a better picture of each student's areas
of strength and weakness.
Last spring when we first sat down as a faculty to do this, teachers began
to remark on how students' grades did not consistently reflect their level
of achievement on these assessments. YES!!! So, that is planting the seed
that we now need to look at how each teacher sets criteria for grading!!!!
big break through in thinking about how we look at our students' progress
- next step will be having our student grading reflect each student's progress
toward meeting the content area standards - that will take some time! And
patience for this principal! Let's keep talking about this area!
--------------------------------------------------------------
Here's a good book our faculty read over the summer and discussed in August:
Safe
to Be Smart: Building a Culture for Standards-Based Reform in the Middle
School_ by Anne Wheelock, with a foreword by Hayes Mizell. It discusses
(among other things) a paradigm shift needed for letting students assume
responsibility for improving the quality of their work. Good book!
Nancy Long
You can read an excerpt from her book at:
http://www.middleweb.com/WhlckBk.html
--------------------------------------------------------------
I won't make a habit of posting news stories like this, but I thought this
one might stir some conversation. See if you agree with the writer's assessment
that 8th grade math teacher John Q. Adams "provided a case study in
how high--stakes testing -- often maligned as shallow, misdirected and irrelevant
-- can drive improvements in education."
John Norton
listserv postmeister
-------
The New York Times
October 19, 2000
Brooklyn School Breaks From the Pack
Just a year ago, John Q. Adams was holding his aching head and wondering
what had gone wrong. The results of a new state math test had just come
out, and only 39 percent of the eighth graders at his school in Brooklyn
had met state standards.
. . . .This year, while the rest of the city stagnated, I.S. 187, in Dyker
Heights, bucked the trend, posting the biggest gain of any school in the
city. Fifty-- seven percent of the students passed the test, a rise of 18
percentage points.
It was a gain so rare that in today's cynical education environment it was
more likely to invite suspicions of cheating than congratulations.
But in a tour of his school this week, Mr. Adams provided a case study in
how high--stakes testing ---- often maligned as shallow, misdirected and
irrelevant -- can drive improvements in education.
Read the entire story . . .