Thursday, April 12, 2012

Standardized Testing: We Should All Apologize!


Yesterday's post regarding the DISD trustees' consideration of an resolution condemning the overemphasis of standardized testing came as a breath of fresh air!

By the time many of you read this, I hope you're preparing to come to CitySquare's Annual Prayer event in which we are discussing education and poverty. Precious few aspects of public education show the perversion of one of the hallmarks of American democracy - a free public education to all citizens - than the tyranny of this 'testocracy'. While it is problematic to the education process in every school, it is a particular burden on underfunded schools in poor neighborhoods. It leads to children who have been trained to pass the test, but who's school days are so filled with teaching to and preparation for the test that our most gifted teachers have little opportunity to do the job for which they were hire...and which they would love to do: impart real knowledge!

Dallas Morning News writer, Robert Wilonsky (who wrote the article on which yesterday's post was based), cites Washington Post reporter Valerie Strauss, who wrote of the 100 similar school districts sending similar resolutions to the Texas Education Agency. In another post Strauss relays this moving letter from Ruth Ann Dandrea, in which Dandrea apologizes to her students for having them take an English standardized test. What is said of this test, could be said of STAAR, TAAKS, TAAS or any othe myriad acronym heavy, system clogging mind numbing 'high stakes' tests inflicted on our children to ensure 'accountability'. School districts are arriving at the conclusion that most of us arrived at decades ago and which politicians have known even as they've pushed these tests on our children - these exams do not show that a child is educated, they simply show that they have learned how to take the test.
__________________________________

Teacher: Dear students, I’m sorry about that test I made you take


By Valerie Strauss

This was written by Ruth Ann Dandrea, who has taught secondary English in upstate New York for 29 years. A freelance writer, she is co-author of “Women on Water,” about women’s kayaking, which will be available from North Country Press this spring. This appeared in “Pencils Down,” a new book from Rethinking Schools, a publisher of educational materials.
This is the letter from Ruth Ann Dandrea:
Dear 8th Graders,
I’m sorry.
I didn’t know.
I spent last night perusing the 150-plus pages of grading materials provided by the state in anticipation of reading and evaluating your English Language Arts Exams this morning. I knew the test was pointless—that it has never fulfilled its stated purpose as a predictor of who would succeed and who would fail the English Regents in 11th grade. Any thinking person would’ve ditched it years ago. Instead, rather than simply give a test in 8th grade that doesn’t get kids ready for the test in 11th grade, the state opted to also give a test in 7th grade to get you ready for your 8th-grade test.
But we already knew all of that.
What I learned is that the test is also criminal.
Because what I hadn’t known — this is my first time grading this exam — was that it doesn’t matter how well you write, or what you think. Here we spent the year reading books and emulating great writers, constructing leads that would make everyone want to read our work, developing a voice that would engage our readers, using our imaginations to make our work unique and important, and, most of all, being honest. And none of that matters. All that matters, it turns out, is that you cite two facts from the reading material in every answer. That gives you full credit. You can compose a “Gettysburg Address” for the 21st century on the apportioned lines in your test booklet, but if you’ve provided only one fact from the text you read in preparation, then you will earn only half credit. In your constructed response — no matter how well written, correct, intelligent, noble, beautiful, and meaningful it is —if you’ve not collected any specific facts from the provided readings (even if you happen to know more information about the chosen topic than the readings provide), then you will get a zero.
And here’s the really scary part, kids: The questions you were asked were written to elicit a personal response, which, if provided, earn you no credit. You were tricked; we were tricked. I wish I could believe that this paradox (you know what that literary term means because we have spent the year noting these kinds of tightropings of language) was simply the stupidity of the test-makers, that it was not some more insidious and deliberate machination. I wish I could believe that. But I don’t.
I told you, didn’t I, about hearing Noam Chomsky speak recently? When the great man was asked about the chaos in public education, he responded quickly, decisively, and to the point: “Public education in this country is under attack.” The words, though chilling, comforted me in a weird way. I’d been feeling, the past few years of my 30-plus-year tenure in public education, that there was something or somebody out there, a power of a sort, that doesn’t really want you kids to be educated. I felt a force that wants you ignorant and pliable, and that needs you able to fill in the boxes and follow instructions. Now I’m sure.
It’s not that I oppose rigorous testing. I don’t. I understand the purpose of evaluation. A good test can measure achievement and even inspire. But this English Language Arts Exam I so unknowingly inflicted on you does neither. It represents exactly what I am opposed to, the perpetual and petty testing that has become a fungus on the foot of public education. You understand that metaphor, I know, because we have spent the year learning to appreciate the differences between figurative and literal language. The test-makers have not.
So what should you do, my beautiful, my bright, my intelligent, my talented? Continue. Continue to question. I applaud you, sample writer: When asked the either/or question, you began your response, “Honestly, I think it is both.” You were right, and you were brave, and the test you were taking was neither. And I applaud you, wildest 8th grader of my own, who — when asked how a quote applied to the two characters from the two passages provided — wrote, “I don’t think it applies to either one of them.” Wear your zeroes proudly, kids. This is a test you need to fail.
I wondered whether giving more than 10 minutes of every class period to reading books of our own choosing was a good idea or not. But you loved it so. You asked for more time. Ask again; I will give you whatever you need. I will also give you the best advice I can, advice from the Nobel Prize-winning writer, Juan Ramón Jiménez. Ray Bradbury thought this was so important, he used it as the epigraph at the beginning of Fahrenheit 451: “When they give you lined paper, write the other way.”
It is the best I have to offer, beyond my apologies for having taken part in an exercise that hurt you, and of which I am mightily ashamed.

No comments: