Slashdot Mirror


Study: Standardized Tests Overwhelming Public Schools (washingtonpost.com)

An anonymous reader writes: A new study examined the amount of time U.S. public schools spend on government-mandated standardized tests, and found that the requirements are detrimental to both students and teachers. On average, students will take 112 standardized tests during their K-12 education. From grades 3-11, students spend over 20 hours per year on standardized tests alone. "It portrays a chock-a-block jumble, where tests have been layered upon tests under mandates from Congress, the U.S. Department of Education and state and local governments, many of which the study argues have questionable value to teachers and students. Testing companies that aggressively market new exams also share the blame, the study said."

The U.S. Department of Education has issued an action plan to school districts outlining ways to reduce useless tests and eliminate redundant ones. President Obama even posted a video pledging to reduce the test load of American students. "Standardized testing has caused intense debate on Capitol Hill as lawmakers work to craft a replacement for No Child Left Behind. Testing critics tried unsuccessfully to erase the federal requirement that schools test in math and reading. Civil rights advocates pushed back, arguing that tests are an important safeguard for struggling students because publicly reported test scores illuminate the achievement gap between historically underserved students and their more affluent peers."

26 of 278 comments (clear)

  1. Did they learn anything?? by laurencetux · · Score: 5, Insightful

    the biggest problem with No Child Left Behind is it turns out to be No Child Allowed to Excel.

    So we need to fix Teach The Test first.

    1. Re:Did they learn anything?? by AK+Marc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That was the whole point of NCLB. To sabotage the schools to help push vouchers to subsidize the school of the 1%. The sabotage is great, and the public can't figure out how to object to "help" that hurts. After all, the pro-school voters can't even comprehend someone deliberately harm school children to push a political agenda fr more welfare for the rich. Until the voters understand the evil nature of some in politics, we'll get the evil, sold as "help".

    2. Re:Did they learn anything?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly. Plus, if the "small government" conservatives allow teachers to actually, you know, teach, that causes them problems. First off, it inherently recognizes teachers as actual professionals and flies in the face of the whole "incompetent teachers protected by the big nasty teachers union" narrative the like to push. Also, and the primary reason for the teachers union meme in the first place, educators have a nasty habit of teaching things they believe to be true as opposed to what is good for corporations or religion and that does not suit the right wingers well either.

      Hence the push for for-profit charter schools and other such corporate entities that are designed first and foremost to indoctrinate and control, and where that doesn't work we have these bundles of for-profit standardized tests to make sure that there's no time in the classroom day for things like critical thinking skills or anything subversive like that.

    3. Re: Did they learn anything?? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Informative

      Vouchers will get students out of failing public schools, like, Newark, Chicago, etc. and give them a chance to break the cycle of poverty.

      School vouchers are a scam to keep the prisons full. If you hear someone talk about "school reform", run for the hills. They're famous flim-flammers.

      The school "privatization" movement is one of the biggest scandals of the 21st century. Charter schools fail. They exist to funnel money upward, not to educate kids.

      http://www.salon.com/2014/02/1...

      http://www.philly.com/philly/b...

      http://www.eschatonblog.com/20...

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    4. Re: Did they learn anything?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't think that you understand how teaching and learning actually works. What's good for the teacher is good for the student. When a teacher is overworked, underpaid, has low moral, and has the media and the entire right wing of American politics telling them that they are stupid, overpaid, part time employees and they don't deserve unions, bathroom breaks, being able to work one job and still support their family, etc., do you really think they can still do a good job? Is that what's best for students? Nope. A well rested, happy, motivated teacher with fewer worries is going to do the best job in the classroom. That's why there are teacher unions. And because there are too many people who think like you.

    5. Re:Did they learn anything?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The school environment is set up just like the workplace:

      1. Show up between X hours every day.
      2. Everyone follows the same rules, learns the same things, and performs the same tasks.
      3. You're punished if you step a toe out of line. Threats of suspension, expulsion are equally expressed as detrimental as being fired / laid off, though many of us know the setbacks of the latter.
      4. You'll get a little bit of time for electives, but even those will be limited in time and selection. (Equate that to limited time off.)
      5. Everyone pay attention to the 1 person talking to you, and do as you're told; that is, the majority follows the minority in a hierarchy where those in charge are hardly ever punished for treating people like crap -- unless it affects the bottom line ($$$).

      I think 12 years of experience in this environment is great training.

      The only grade you get to do everything is kindergarten. I refer to the book by Robert Fulghum, "All I Really Need to KNow I Learned in Kindergarten."

      In my personal experience, this is mostly true: share with others, treat people with respect, say please and thank you. I may not be a millionaire, or a billionaire, or even own a house (I live in an apt.), but I also don't have a shitty life. Throughout school, I fought back against anything that didn't make sense: teachers decisions included, giving many people the idea that I'd be a failure in life. Boy, I've proved them wrong. I've never been fired, or laid off, and since I've been 19, haven't earned less than $36,000/yr for a single person. (That's more than 3x the poverty line for 1 person.)

      Education isn't the problem, it's teaching kids to stop being complacent with what's available. If it doesn't make sense, question it. Instead, I direct you to this: http://www.stevepavlina.com/blog/2006/07/10-reasons-you-should-never-get-a-job/

    6. Re:Did they learn anything?? by thesupraman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What maked you think its about the '1%'? do you think they even care?

      Have a look at the teachers, the administrators, the associated unions, the 'think of the children' reactionary crowd, and you soon see that education is pretty much doomed before it begins.

      The majority working in education, especially younger grades, now just see it as a meal ticket, and the kids as an annoyance to be avoided as much as possible.
      Standardised testing is a threat to their ability to do as little as possible for this paychecks.

      The truly sad part of all of this is the teachers (and administrators) who do really care, are being pushed out by this - they get drowned in a system where there is more and more administrative overhead designed to 'measure' everything (and do nothing), which makes is close to impossible to both do a good job and to meet 'requirements'. They tend to either burn out or give up.

      What we desperately need is:
      A return of a path for good teachers to become administrators - and a removal of 'career' administrators who are just collecting a paycheck.
      A strong message to the unions that our childrens schools do NOT exist to give their members a chushy ride, and 'think of the children' cries mixed with 'we can hold them to ransom' threats of action are not acceptible.
      A return of GENDER BALANCE in teachers - it is not healthy that 90% of lower school teachers are now female, and male teachers are being actively removed.
      A removal of teachers 'tenure', which is just an attcak on the kids, combined with:
      Active performance measurement of teachers RESULTS (not self assessed). A teacher who is not performing for her students must not be allowed to continue damaging childrens education!, and note:
      THIS is why teachers cannot self-assess their students! The good teachers judge students harshly, to motivate them, but therefore they look bad - poor teachers however are free to judge their students very easily (this is very very widely documented), making the bad teacher look good...
      And finally, school costs not DIRECTLY related to education need to be taken to, harshly. Large fancy off-site administration buildings do NOT help kids learn better.

      Teachers need respect, and teachers need to EARN respect. Teaching children is a critical role - however we seem to be doing everything possible to damage the profession in return for making teachers lives more comfortable. Imagine if we did the same for pilots or surgeons..

      Is it really that difficult?

    7. Re:Did they learn anything?? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Informative

      a kid growing up in manhatten doesnt need to know things like hunting where a kid in the adirondacks would get much more from learning how to hunt than say...spanish

        thats just one example

      Elementary schools teach neither hunting nor Spanish, so that is a pretty dumb example. Why would something like math, or reading, need to be taught differently in Manhattan vs the Adirondacks?

    8. Re: Did they learn anything?? by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      To be fair, public schools also fail. You link to Philly.com. Philadelphia School District doubled funding over 10 years and had absolutely nothing to show for it. While I think that the way we fund schools is bat-shit crazy - giving wealthier kids more resources and poor kids less - please don't summarily dismiss just how corrupt many of our cities' school systems are. You are largely correct that charters funnel money away from kids, and yet in Newark more money reaches students at the charter schools than at the traditional public schools. Small wonder parents go to great lengths to get their kids into charters in certain districts.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    9. Re: Did they learn anything?? by KGIII · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So you're willing to waste a few generations of children to wait for the free hand to take its effect?

      Tell me that you don't identify as a Libertarian, please?

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    10. Re: Did they learn anything?? by Dog-Cow · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You also can't do it with tests.

      For many decades, we had schools in which the teachers gave tests that they created it. They used them to grade the students. Failed students would be held back. Passing students would continue their academic career. That's how practically every education American was raised, even in the private schools. Ask yourself what happened that a complete change was required. Why is it suddenly necessary for standardized tests to be created by biased third-parties? Why is it so important that every single child advance at the same rate as every other?

    11. Re: Did they learn anything?? by ender- · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So you're willing to waste a few generations of children to wait for the free hand to take its effect?

      Tell me that you don't identify as a Libertarian, please?

      It doesn't take generations. My child was going to a charter school. When she started in 1st grade, it was wonderful. The school was fantastic. By 3rd grade, the school had changed and it was no longer a good fit for her. We took her out of that school and put her in another school. We had the immediate choice and ability to move her to another school.

      With regular public schools, you have no choice. You go to the school that the government tells you to go to based on your address. If that school is terrible and/or can't properly serve your child [whether it be because the child is gifted or because the child has learning disabilities], you have no recourse. Most people don't have the ability to move into whatever school district/zone they want to.

      That's not to say that the charter school concept doesn't have issues, but I think it would make more sense to work to mitigate those issues rather than just saying that charter schools are no good and getting rid of them completely.

  2. I know people will go crazy over this idea.... by gfxguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe education should be back in the hands of the states, like it used to be. Yes, I know that'll result in ignorant morons who will be taught to scorn evolution, or consider Pi to be 3 (that's a myth, though, but funny), but then people can choose which states to live in... which was the whole point of allowing states to operate largely independently to begin with.

    --
    Stupid sexy Flanders.
    1. Re:I know people will go crazy over this idea.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'll add in an anecdote. My mother is a substitute teacher (in Florida) for a class, and has been asked to give out this state given test. The class is something along the very bottom of the school (some kids may not speak english as one possible reason to be in it). Well, the school was asked to give an answer key for the required test, which they didn't give. So I was asked to make a key for her to grade with. The test was horrible. The most obvious problems are with the formatting. There is no clean indication of where a question ends and the next begins. Some of the questions have numbers floating above or below the parenthesis they are supposed to be inside. Some of the questions have multiple answers, which would be fine, if the wording did not seem as if it was trying to misdirect the students on what they are trying to do. It even goes so far that on the answer sheet made for this specific test, the last two questions were obviously switched, as the penultimate had 5 answer fields for 4 possible answers, and the last had 4 answer fields for 5 possible answers. Remember, some of these require selecting more than one bubble.

      There is all of that, and not to mention the copy job on making the test was even shoddy. I have no idea if the test is actually from the State, the District, or from the School itself, but the test looked like it was setup for the students to fail on purpose. Being put through things like this, I can only sympathize with the students if they are forced to act out to get any sort of attention. There is certainly a lack of care on the school's part for them.

    2. Re:I know people will go crazy over this idea.... by frnic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "but then people can choose which states to live in",

      Yeah, because no one is locked into a bad mortgage, or a bad job, or a healthcare issue that precludes moving from where they are being treated or, well, it doesn't matter. As long as YOU can move when and where you want to.

      Standards are NOT the problem, the problem is the money to be made managing education, selling tests, and books. Like everything we allow "business" to run, it runs wild putting profits above all else.

  3. 20 hours? That's nothing. by Nikkos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    9 months school x 20 days/mo x 8 hrs/day = 1440 hours.

    1.3% of their time is spent on test. So what? They spend more time than that at lunch, at recess, or even in the toilet (10min/day = 30 hours/year)

    If they're going to attack standardized tests, at least have an argument that withstands even basic contextual comparisons.

    1. Re: 20 hours? That's nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How much Fox News do you watch to think like that?

      Teachers can't stand standardized tests, precisely because they are forced to spend what they believe to be unnecessary amounts of time teaching students to pass the tests as opposed to teaching students. They have to do this because if a teacher has a group of students who perform badly on the tests, then they get their resources cut, which leads to worse performance, etc. Of course, teachers have no control over which students get assigned to their classes anyway, so the only thing they can do to combat this is to go work elsewhere, which makes bad schools worse. This is all as designed, to eviscerate public education in favor of a for profit model which of course teaches compliance and repetition instead of critical thinking because critical thinking does not make good consumers or corporate drones.

      Of course, what teachers really can't stand is being evaluated by dumbasses. Doctors are evaluated by other doctors, pilots by other pilots, etc. That is because they are professionals who have professional training that people not in those professions lack. Only when something egregious happens (as in leads to a court case) do outsiders get to judge the performance of someone in those professions. Teachers resist the imposition of outside evaluations because they are almost always politically motivated, designed to get rid of teachers who have unpopular views or who go against the party line. They believe, correctly, that the only way to stop this stuff is to not let it start. Hence the standardized tests which technically evaluate the students but which are in fact used as a backdoor evaluation of teachers.

      Now, let's real-world this: your job performance depends on the performance of people who are not your peers nor really your subordinates, who may or may not be motivated to even show up, who you can neither select nor replace, and over whom your have very limited disciplinary options. Sound like a job you'd like to have? That's why teachers hate standardized testing.

    2. Re:20 hours? That's nothing. by whoever57 · · Score: 3, Informative

      There shouldn't be any 'prepping'

      Exactly what do you expect the teachers to do when there are calls to make them more "accountable" and to link their pay to test scores? When schools are judged on their test score results? Your argument is naive and unrealistic.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    3. Re:20 hours? That's nothing. by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 4, Informative

      There shouldn't be any 'prepping'

      If they're teaching to the test, it's corruption and fraud. They shouldn't know what's on it, and they sign agreements not to open/look at the tests in advance.

      It's pretty obvious you don't understand how pervasive the test material stuff has "infected" everyday teaching in many states.

      You're talking about a different phenomenon of actual cheating on tests where teachers give students answers (or something close to it). That's not the kind of preparation that goes on in most classrooms.

      In many states, the standardized tests are derived from state-approved "standards" that spell out specific exercise types which are likely to occur (particularly in basic subjects like math and reading). Teachers who have any experience with these tests over the years notice certain patterns of the types of questions that always show up. (This isn't just for normal "standardized testing" -- it goes for AP tests and such as well. When I taught AP physics, there were all sorts of "lore" passed down among AP teachers because all the previous tests were available, so you knew there was likely to be a question dealing with X, a question on topic Y would probably take a certain form, etc.)

      For decades in states that have had "high-stakes" standardized testing, it has been common to have extra review sessions for students going over these clear patterns in testing, and generally to spend at least 1-2 weeks before the tests reviewing this stuff in class as well. When I taught high school math quite a few years ago in one of these "high-stakes" states (which had such testing even before No Child Left Behind), our district paid teachers extra to do evening review sessions going over such stuff.

      For example, a disproportionate number (95%+) of math problems involving right triangles would involve either (1) the Pythagorean triple 3,4,5 or its multiples, or (2) the triple 5,12,13. (It's possible that 8,15,17 could show up too maybe... but I think it was just the first two which were common.)

      Anyhow, so we'd tell students if they saw a problem with a right triangle, either to expect 5,12,13 or if they saw other numbers to check to see if it was a multiple of 3,4,5.

      Of course, this is ridiculous and antithetical to "deep knowledge" of how triangles or even the basic Pythagorean theorem works, but this is the kind of crap that would show up on tests. And teachers were strongly urged to teach these known patterns because administrators were usually under pressure to maintain certain levels of passing scores on these tests.

      It's gotten much, much worse in the past decade or so -- some states have alliances between the standardized test designers and textbook publishers, so textbooks come with practice tests bundled directly into the textbook.

      I've seen this with some kids of my friends or other family members -- it would not be an exaggeration to say that some of them spend 20%+ of all classtime doing standardized tests, practice tests, or direct prep for such tests (e.g., worksheets designed around known test prep patterns), particularly in core areas like math and English/reading. Many schools adopt "benchmark" schemes with these practice tests to check whether students are "on track" at various points of the year leading up to the actual tests.

      THAT'S what GP was presumably referring to as "test prep" and that's what people usually mean when they talk about class time being monopolized by "teaching to the test." They do NOT generally refer to illegal cheating scandals, but rather the amount that class activities and exercises are tailored to whatever stupid patterns tend to show up on these tests... and that can be much, much more significant than the couple percent or whatever of class time literally spent on taking the tests.

  4. Brought to you by the Teacher's Unions by mveloso · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This report, by the Council of the Great City Schools, is brought to you by the Teacher's Unions, who oppose any attempt to evaluate teacher performance.

  5. No federal constitutional mandate for this by zerofoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Show me where the federal government is given the authority to regulate education in our constitution.

    You can't because control over education was not granted to the federal government in our constitution.

    Schools are staffed, managed and financed locally. Local control over education means that you have a say in how your kids are educated. If you are unhappy with your schools, you can elect a new school board. If that fails, you can always move to another school district.

    Federal control over education standards will be politicized like everything else in Washington. Do you really want the dysfunction that is Washington DC ending up in your kid's classroom?

    Ron Paul is right. The federal government needs to be out of the education business entirely.

    1. Re:No federal constitutional mandate for this by bosef1 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Hell, half the time the Feds are the only ones I kinda trust in the in the Education game.

      Oh, I completely agree with you that the Constitution doesn't say anything about the Federal government doing anything with education.

      However, to me it feels like, if they were left to their own devices, half the counties in the US would be teaching creationism to the male, Caucasian, Protestant children of landholders, and telling everyone else to go pound sand. And another third would be too poor to teach their kids anything. I feel like the Feds, as bureaucratic and glacial as they are, are the only things keeping education sane in many of our communities.

      I would agree that, yes, we _could_ let the free market take care of the issue: if people want to give their children a sub-standard education, they will be less competitive in the national and global markets, and they will be competed out of viability within a few generations. But I would imagine that the competitive process would result in a lot of suffering and economic "readjustment" in the community, stuff that I'm going to be on the hook for as a tax payer. Either now, to make them give their children an appropriate education, or later, to cover their unemployment claims and economic restructuring costs.

      Yes, at the end of it, a lot of this comes down to the progressive "I know better than you how you need to do your things", but how do you stand by when someone is fouling it up so bad. And in a way that could be compared to child abuse.

  6. OMG! (Not) by kenh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    On average, students will take 112 standardized tests during their K-12 education. From grades 3-11, students spend over 20 hours per year on standardized tests alone.

    30 hours a year! Why, if spread out over the 32 weeks of school (185 days = one school year, if there are 5 school days per week, then 185 / 5 = about 32 weeks) that comes out to less than 45 minutes a week, or put another way, about three full school days out of 185, or about 2% of school time per year...

    Something that occupies 2% of student class time per school year is overwhelming students?

    No, it isn't. The teachers unions have made standardized testing the only metric allowed to measure their performance, and now they want to remove even that metric.

    --
    Ken
  7. Re:Needs of the Teaching Profession by serviscope_minor · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The needs of teachers are that they remain employed with the highest salary and best benefits they can get.

    Yeah those evil profiteering teachers. Everywhere I go I see teachers in ferraris, research scientists drinking champaign!

    In the real world not everyone is motivated by greed and capitalism:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

    If teachers wanted higher salaries over all else, then why would they buy school supplies out of pocket? Many teachers, a large fraction I think actually want to teach, and teach well. That way like so many humans they can get real satisfaction out of a job well done.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  8. Standardization is not the the problem by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Standardized Tests Overwhelming Public Schools

    The problem in America is not the concept of standards, but their execution. The way we have them, they are a Rube Goldberg clusterfuck of a system, done like no one else on Earth. And for what? Supposedly to "fix" the lack of education in this country, compared to other countries such as Finland, Singapore, Japan or Germany.

    Which is completely bollocks because the problem with education in this country is that we do not have a sensible way of funding public schools. We fund them primarily with property taxes. And obviously that creates a subsidized segregated system where people living in well-to-do zip codes (like me) get the best resources for their children, whereas people living in poor areas get to send their children to public schools that don't even have soap with which to wash their hands.

    The problem is economic segregation, and what we see now are just symptoms that were going to happen, federal government or not. The only good thing I see about standardized tests is that they are the final catalysts that make all this crap come up to the surface.

    If the federal government has a say on education, then the federal government must provide a fix % bracket for funding as a function of the number of children in a given school, regardless of zip code.

    If we do not want the feds in it, but want the states to fund education, then do the same, have the federal government dictate a minimum % bracket for funding schools as a function of the # of children in them, regardless of zip code.

    Either way will solve the root cause of all this crap. Then and only then we should be tackling test standardization.

  9. Not all Teachers Good by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If teachers wanted higher salaries over all else, then why would they buy school supplies out of pocket?

    Those are the good teachers who are sadly a vanishing breed. However the unions do not just represent good teachers they represent the bad ones as well. I'd happily support higher salaries for teachers: my mum was a teacher, my sister is a teacher and I'm a professor. Salaries are so low that they are part of the problem at the moment since it is hard to attract excellent teachers to the profession.

    My point was not that teachers are not due a raise but that the unions are damaging the profession immensely because their priorities have increasingly little overlap with the priorities of the profession. In the absence of money from government for salaries they negotiate for increased job security (which makes it hard to fire bad teachers) and for a reduced work load (which impacts student learning).

    This damage has resulted in a loss of respect for teachers: it's hard to respect your son's teacher when she is telling him that 6/9 is less than 2/3 even when he, and later I, pointed out that they are the same fraction. When a teacher like that cannot be fired for gross incompetence (that was not her only gap in knowledge) you have a serious problem.