The tension in the room was real. As a new professor to the university setting, my colleague had drug me along to a statewide task force meeting to discuss our statewide assessment problems. It was clear from the anxious faces around the room that people weren’t seeing eye-to-eye on how our statewide assessment system was supposed to work. On one side of the table were national experts on assessment who served in an advisory capacity to the state, people like James Popham and David Berliner. Also in the room were various state department employees with responsibility over state testing, and various experts from the commercial vendors that currently held the state contract for creating the statewide assessment.
The debates and arguments went on all day. One one side were the national experts pressuring the state to create an “instructionally supportive” assessment. An assessment that teachers could actually use to inform their instruction and make adjustments to better help students. The year before this meeting, the state had given the assessment twice. Results were returned to schools, teachers modified their instruction and shored up weak areas with students and then another form of the test was given again. The results the second time were very impressive as students showed big gains.
Sounds great huh? The problem is that the feds rejected our assessment saying it did not meet the criteria for NCLB because the test was given twice. It seems the goal is not really to help students, only to get a one-time measurement on their “proficiency.”
The dilemma for the states is clear. Even if you want to create “instructionally supportive” assessments the money interferes with logical thinking. Once states start ”mainlining” federal funds they can’t risk losing the money.
So this state’s experiment with creating an “instructionally supportive” assessment went down in flames. Our state now gives the assessment one time just like the coroner gives the autopsy once. Results are returned when the school year is over.
Tags: accountability · assessment · national standards · school improvement · standardized testing · testing2 Comments
So many schools have learned to get by with very little. Has any research been done on how much would be impacted if a state turned down federal money and created its own, effectively functional schooling system?
Last I checked, Our constitution put public education on the states, not the feds. Who will be the first state to turn down the money and strings attached for the sake of better education?
Walt,
In the age of accountability that is a bitter pill to swallow. Consider the newest federal grant, “Race to the Top.” When the economy is in recovery, and in Missouri the funding is at least a year behind the recession, few public schools can sacrifice the funding tied to high-stakes assessment. It’s extremely unfortunate.