Why I Don't Get Rah-Rah Over Standardized Testing

Had a conversation with someone who shall remain nameless about motivating students to do better on the HSA (Hawaii State Assesments, which will be replaced next year by the Common Core Smarter Balanced test.)  This person prefaced our conversation by saying that she also hates standardized testing and what its emphasis has done to our schools. Yet she says, but I do make a big deal out of it and I have had 90% of my students, some of whom were special education students, either pass or improve on their HSA. 

Perhaps this correlation can be made - I don't make a big deal of the HSA: My students do not score well on them. (We just took the first round of two). Therefore, If I were to become a cheerleader for the HSA, my students would score better. Why would I do this? Let me play devil's advocate to myself.  If getting a proficiency score on the HSA meant that the student would come away with the experience a better person, a more confident person, believing that if they can get 300, they can do anything, wouldn't I want to gift them with this nugget of self-worth? Wouldn't I sacrifice my own personal beliefs about the fallacies of standardized testing so that students would receive this oh so valuable gift? If I don't, and can't make that sacrifice, am I being selfish, egocentric, disingenuous, a charlatan? 

I guess I have this thing about meaning. I abhor meaninglessness. I don't believe the HSA is meaningful because there is no way for us to know if what we are teaching is really matched to the test. We have to assume. We have to trust, without ability to verify.  In this transition year to the Common Core, we were told that there was a different "Bridge Assessment" and that if we focused on these identified Common Core standards, this is what would be in the bridge. So, like good soldiers, we made these standards the focus of our instruction, and the objectives in our SLOs. (Hawaii teachers know this as the bane of our year). Come to find out, it looks like the same HSA test as before. This was confirmed by a DOE talking head who told us that it would have been better for us to focus on the old standards rather than the Common Core. 

And then we were given, during our duty-free lunch period (never again!), these color copies that are supposed to show student growth over time based on the HSA. Our evaluation is going to be based on how their scores improved or did not from year to year. Oh, the outrage. Generally, what most of us on my grade level see, is a decrease from third to fifth grade. Can this be because we are all terrible teachers? Is that the only variable? We only know that some of the high scores do not reflect the students that we know. But there is no way to validate. When we agreed to the new Educator Evaluation System, we agreed to fair, reliable, valid means of evaluation. This way of showing student growth is totally junk science, and our union had better make this clear to the DOE. Getting rah-rah about something that is so pernicious is like being forced to campaign for someone I don't believe in, is like marrying someone I don't love, like drinking whiskey that I don't like the taste of just because I've been told it's good stuff.  I will keep looking for apt similes. 

I can see getting rah-rah about doing well in school, about paying attention in class, and participating to learn. About learning. About increasing knowledge and skills. About thinking. About communicating. About problem-solving. About getting along with each other. About celebrating and developing your strengths and strengthening your weaknesses. This is what is meaningful to me as a teacher. This is why I teach. But I do not teach to be validated by my students' standardized test scores. 

I am not done with this topic. I have not answered the question posed by my devil's advocate in my second paragraph. To be continued. 

Testing and all the other evaluation stuff is what I thought about when I saw this. 

Write it! Sing it!

I have written songs  for teaching in the past, but after attending GLAD training, I am affirmed that this is a good thing to do, and helps students to learn material better. So I have gone to town with this, and I have written a lot of songs for math since the training.  (Answer words for operations, partial quotients for division, use multiplication to solve division, estimation, rounding, subtraction with regrouping) One thing that I haven't done yet, is upload them to the GLAD site. It's on my to-do list, but I never seem to get to it. 

I am a bit disappointed that they are not magic spells. Students still need to put some energy and effort out to learn the material even if it is packaged in the form of a song or a chant. Case on point: I wrote about estimation to the tune of Hallelujah, that you round the 2- digit divisor to the nearest ten to start with, (Estimation/Two-Digit/Divisor/Round to tens.... ) and I still see students who forget to try that and are stumped because they are trying to estimate with a divisor of 27, when they could more easily estimate with 30. 

To be fair to me- many more students are better at estimation than when I first tried to teach them. I don't know if it's because of the songs or just practice, or having the expectation that this is part of the assignment. 

No matter, I realized that writing songs and chants sustains me. When I have had a down day, frustrated over students' progress, wondering how else I can present a concept so that they can learn it better, I write a song or chant. I don't go on a search on the internet or the GLAD website. I am inclined to write it myself. I enjoy it. I am rejuvenated by it. 

(The image here is a beautiful testament to music, and I think what I do is like a little fingernail of what it should be, but at least it's a little fingernail. ) 

Testing Week: Fraud and Quiet

      Standardized testing week is a mixed bag. Here's the up side. My load is easier because I don't teach during the week, and I give very little homework. Because I don't have stacks of papers to grade, I have more time to plan, which is the part of teaching that I enjoy. Only a few of my students are stressed out by testing, because I don't make it a big deal. Only the ones who put pressure on themselves or pick up the pressure from other sources, stress out. I give them snacks. It is quiet for a change. Aw, peace and quiet. Afterwards, when everyone is done they had free time on the computers. There is still a sense of optimism because they know there is another chance in May. And if they improve, which most do, we are happy, even if they don't make that magic 300.

Now, the down side, aside from connectivity issues.

        We are not supposed to look at the questions. We are not supposed to read them the questions because there is, in math, a text-to-speech feature to do that, even if many students don't use it (it sounds weird, it sounds fuzzy, it sounds like a robot, I hate that voice). I am not supposed to tell them to use the text-to-speech even if I notice that they are not using it, I know they are poor readers, or there is a lot of difficult text. I am not supposed to remind them to use the formula chart if they forget what volume or area is. I am not supposed to tell them to go back and check their work even though I know they rushed, and know they randomly clicked clicked through it. All I am supposed to do is teach them what I can beforehand, teach them the tools that are there beforehand, set up the test, get my session ID, approve them to get them started, and log out when the session is done.

Standardized testing, whether online or bubble tests, have always troubled me as a teacher. I don't really remember them when I was a student. Oh yeah, that's because they didn't overrun the school year. I remember PSATs, ACTs and SATs, but that wasn't a school thing, only for those of us planning to go to college. But my memories of school (public school in Guam) were the projects I did, the songs I sang, the friends I hung out with, the games I played, the reports I wrote, the classes and teachers I had, my little (multiplication tables) and big (school spelling bee champ, student council, honor society) victories. Oh, and the bomb scares in high school. 

As an adult, I took the GREs and the PRAXIS teaching test, which I studied for using the commercial study guides. These were very helpful. You could do well on the test because you knew what was going to be on the test, and you could study for it. 

But, our computerized HSA is not like that. There is no way to know if the questions are aligned to the standards, to know if what you are teaching is what is being tested.  When it was a bubble test, you could read the questions, and once in a while you found one that was ridiculous, not a match to standard, or confusing, even to a teacher. You were able to send your concerns to the testing office and usually get a response. One year, a testing company was fired because of so many complaints and errors.  But now, you can't do that because if you do, you are revealing that you "looked," you broke protocol - broke the rules! 

Yet, starting this year, thanks to our new Educator Evaluation System, 25% of our rating will be determined by student test scores. Some would say that is nothing to be worried about because if you get effective ratings on the other 75%, you're still good. However, how can we held accountable for test scores if we have no way to verify that it is a valid test? Are the questions well-written? Are they a match to standards? Is it really a test for the standard, or is it more a test for computer skills, or reading skills? Or test-taking skills? 

          And then there's the Common Core. We were told that only certain Common Core standards would be on what they called the "bridge" assessment. We have a new Common Core curriculum, (GoMath) and so we are dealing with not only the implementation of a new curriculum and new standards, but supposedly a different "bridge" assessment. We were told to focus on only a few CC standards that would be on the HSA, which we did. Here is where I confess that I looked at the test. In my criminal "looking", I did not see any of these bridge standards, but it pretty much looked like the usual online HSA. However, there is really no way to verify my hunch or not, because I wasn't supposed to be "looking." But here we were, being good little boys and girls (us teachers) teaching what we thought we had to be accountable for, and then, oh, never mind. Rug pulled out. Ouch. 

Today, on the Badass Teachers Facebook page, a question was asked: "Should we start petitions in every state demanding that all standardized tests be returned to teachers and parents for their review, so they can use them to help students?" Resounding yes to that. This is the ONLY use I can see from standardized tests. Unless I see specifically how my students answered on these tests, I won't know what I need to help them with, or if it is even worth spending time on. As it is, it is meaningless. Oh yes, like I said in the first paragraph, there are a few selfish perks to it, but still meaningless educationally and a waste of time and resources. 

       Anti-testing activists (I consider myself one) claim our current climate of standardized testing is child abuse. It doesn't appear that way if you observe my classes. The crime is not child abuse. The crime is fraud. 

Addressing Gender Gaps - Under-Achieving Boys

In Hawaii, all public schools are supposed to go through a stakeholder-involved process to adopt their academic and financial plans for the following year. Most people look forward to this process like doing taxes, or serving on juries, or getting a root canal.  This year, our energetic vice principal led the process with sincerity and enthusiasm, and it was, for the most part, a positive endeavor. Speaking for myself, if I can come away with even one piece of insight that I didn't have before, I am satisfied. And I did. 

One of the last things we had to do was look at the academic "data" -  aw that dreaded four-letter word. This one piece stood out for me, and for many. We have a significant gender gap in achievement in which the girls out-perform the boys in ALL areas. I normally take test data with many grains of salt, but when I saw this one, it resonated. At the risk of being considered sexist for making generalizations about boys vs girls, I think the data, and especially my gut resonance to the data, needed to be taken seriously. 

I know it's the boys who frustrate me because it's the boys who "fool around" too much, who don't focus, who get into fights, who don't control their impulses, who take pens apart to make spitball cannons, who swear, who get sent to the office for referrals, who defy authority. These are generalizations, but it is generally the truth. I love them for their energy, but the shadow part of this energy is frustration. Not to say that all girls are angels, but they generally don't have the negative behaviors that disrupt the classroom environment, as I set it up. 

I didn't have to reflect too long to realize what I needed to do. It's what I've been saying I needed to do for a long time, but that I have a hard time doing in a significant way. I need to do more science, which I love anyway, and in math, I need to do more games. As for the classroom learning environment, I need to be more tolerant of noise, although that is a fine line because many of the girls complain when it is too noisy, and I need to consider their needs too. I noticed that if the learning is happening through hands-on games, no one notices the noise. In the games, I need to use competition as a motivator, balancing the goal of cooperation as well. That is also a fine line. 

Now, I know that the "data" inspired me to make some conscious choices to have a more boy-friendly environment. It is enough for me, to have all my students engaged and enjoying learning. Ironically, even though I came to this resolve via test score data, I don't really care about the test score results. I think when I start making the test results the goal, I make behavioral control the issue, which becomes like herding wild goats with the boys. I believe that the obsession with standards and test scores is the problem. I lie if I say I don't care about the test results. It is hard not to let it affect you. That is also a fine line, to care enough and not to care too much about something that may or may not be connected to actual student learning. But focusing on meeting the needs of the students, boys and girls, is more valuable to me. It is what I try to make my credo. 

This is a boy - girl team who made a robot out of recycled materials and also were successful at making the snowflake "flower" seen in the foreground. 

Mid-Year Testing Blues

Before break, there was mid-year testing. It is computerized so we get immediate results, but we don't really know what was tested and what the questions were. We just have to have faith that it is a valid instrument, a valid way of showing growth. But I am of little faith in these things. Oh me, of little faith.

Results?  I'm disappointed. Depressed, even, if I stop to let it affect me. I shake it off. The reports don't give me much information except their scores and whether or not they passed certain standards. On the one hand, I can say that our students are lacking pre-requisite skills to be ready for these new standards. This gap in their learning is to be expected. On the other hand, it still feels terrible. 

I have been tracking their progress in class. I know their skills have improved. Most of them are better at solving a long division problem than they are at estimating. I am not okay with that because it means they don't really have conceptual understanding. But, at least they can divide now. Many of them. If I just look at their work in class, I feel more successful. But somehow it didn't transfer in the test-taking situation. I am willing to change my practice so that students think critically, understand conceptually, even learn to enjoy math. But I am not willing to change my practice with the intent to do well on tests. 

I have heard this line of thinking that if students are engaged, and your teaching strategies are sound, then students will do well on tests. I disagree. My life as a teacher is about negotiating this tension. Can we just teach? No, because now we have to be publicly accountable. Our lives and our careers will be based on how well our students do on these standardized tests. Even if it's only 25% of our total evaluation score, there's a psychological effect that makes it feel like 100%.

What can I do? Pause. Reflect. Decide. Imua. I need to re-commit to engaging, meaningful lessons in which students can work cooperatively with each other and get something out of it even if they are at different levels. I will find ways to pull aside students who need extra help. I will find ways to challenge students who need to move ahead. I will maintain high standards in terms of critical thinking over rote learning. If I can keep that focus, and not mope about test scores, I will be able to get through the year.

Good Idea Grant Project Unfolds

Another thing that happened was that I got my Good Idea grant project going (projects using electronic modules called LittleBits). It's not going quite how I envisioned it, but it's going. I had to decide from the beginning how structured to make this. I went with the Little Bits company motto, "Make Something That Does Something." Pretty loose. At a certain point, I had this feeling that it was chaotic, and not going how it was supposed to go. The students were supposed to make a plan, and then build from their plan. It seemed that they were just doing whatever came to their mind. They saw styrofoam balls and wanted to make a snowman. They saw pipe cleaners and wanted to make candy canes. And heaven forbid, someone made guns from the connecting cubes. They were even making projects that had no plan to incorporate the Little Bits! They started to do their own thing rather than work with partners, which was one of the objectives. The supply box was a mess. The room was a mess. This same day, my principal came in, and I was horrified, because I thought things were going very badly. When she left, I had a talk with them. And as I was talking to them, I realized that there were a few teams who were focused, on task, and actually putting a lot of thought and effort into their projects.  One student had ambitious plans to make a hover craft, but realized, after trying, that with the materials we had, it would not work. This is exactly the idea. This is engineering, trial and error, problem-solving. No, the projects were not very complex, but it was a first effort. When I spoke to my principal the next day, she had noticed those good projects and said encouraging things. I think I got a thumbs up from her. I am thinking about how I can make the process more structured when we get back from break. I will not give up.

Why Professional Development? What the answer is not

I haven't written in a while, which is strange because so much has happened. We had a whole week of very good professional development (GLAD training based on best practices especially for English Language Learners and 1 day of Singapore math). The kind of professional development in which you know you learned something and you know you will use what you learned, because it makes so much sense. In a way, it's validating that this is what the "powers that be" are encouraging us to do. It seems child-centered, language-development centered, and in the case of one day training with Singapore math, conceptual understanding focused. This is in line with my philosophy of teaching. A couple of times the trainers referred to how the students will do better on tests if you use these strategies, and I noted my dislike for that reference on their evaluation. I understand that testing is so much a part of our teaching culture, that to suggest that it is not important "does not compute." Writing is important, communication is important, language is important, thinking is important. But standardized high stakes testing is not that important. At some point, my way of thinking will be the norm and not the radical viewpoint. So I have to keep saying it, planting those seeds, reminding people to always have their teaching philosophy at the front of their consciousness. Most teachers don't say that the reason they teach is so their students can do well on tests. I hope not anyways. Most teachers will say either they love children and want to make a difference in their lives or they love a certain subject and want to share that love with their students.