Module 30

I am still a little confused about the No Child Left Behind act. It seems like there are good intentions behind it but why do a lot of people not agree with it?

Some tensions that arise with high stakes standardized testing include the students and teachers. For the teachers, they are put under a lot of pressure for their students to do well. If their students don't do well, then they could possibly lose their job which would also header their opportunities in getting a job at another school. For the students there is tension because their scores on the test could decide on weather or not they can go to college. This put a lot of pressure on students regardless of their social economic status. If their parents want them to attend an Ivy league school, then they have to do well. If their family is in need of financial aid, then they might have to go to college and earn a degree to help support their family.

High stakes testing measures student intelligence and then that information is used to see how well the teachers and the school are performing in student learning. If the level of achievement is not up to par, then the teachers are evaluated and could possibly lose their jobs.

It is hard to decide why a student failed the test based on their score. It could possibly be because of factors they can not help such as a disability or English is not their first language. It could be that the test was worded confusingly or was unclear of the question was asking. It could also be because of the teacher. They might not have prepared their students well enough for the test. This is why I don't care for these standardized tests because there are many factors that go into student achievement and I don't think it fair to only score right or wrong answers.

module 30 post

What is construct validity and differential item functioning in English please? Also, what are these “subgroups” that are mentioned frequently in the first few pages of the module, and what is there function with the ideas talked about in this section of the module?

High stake standardized testing more than anything else, lowers the self-efficacy in students that don’t score well on them, causing more dropouts later on than if there were not any high stake standardized testing. Also, it causes teachers to end up “teaching the test”, where they center the entire semester around the particular concepts that will be on the standardized test, and leaves little to no room for exploring new ideas, expanding creativity or group projects. Finally, the Academic Yearly Progress program is way too strict, implying that if the school is not continuously significantly growing in areas EVERY SINGLE year, they can face serious financial consequences. This will cause an OPPOSITE effect than desired: if you give less funding to a school with poor performance, then how in the WORLD is that supposed to help the school grow??

High stake tests are measuring whether the students have learned the concepts of the subject. The content on the test itself isn’t incorrect in any way or is trying to assess something irrelevant to the subject at hand; it’s just the circumstance of the testing and the high stakes that cause the trouble (as mentioned in the previous paragraph). So if intelligence equals learned relevant material, then yes, the test is measuring intelligence. But they are also measuring the quality of the teachers and school curriculum in order for the state to know whether they should cut funding or not. They measure accountability.

If the student fails the test, it could either mean they have not learned the material because they didn’t pay attention throughout the semester, the teacher didn’t teach all of the relevant material, or that the test is culturally biased. So, I don’t think that making me decide between whether to blame it on either the student or the test is fair, because that is ignoring the fact that maybe the teacher isn’t teaching well, and it’s the teacher’s fault.

QUESTION/CONCERN!

1.  I don't understand why test score pollution exists.

MODULE 30 POST 1!

1.
2.  There are many tensions that arise from standardized testing for teachers, students, and parents.  These include published test results (school), promotion (students and teachers), pay raises/bonuses (teachers), funding (schools), futures, both college-wise and career-wise (students and teachers)...any of the high stakes that affect students also affect the parents of those students.  (ex: a student who goes to a school in which many students are accepted to ivy leagues may affect his parent's socially as well as himself).  These high stakes arise because there really is no other way to create progress for schools, teachers, or students besides comparison of test results.
3.  High-stakes tests are designed to measure both intelligence and mastery of skills on a grand scale.  I know this, because for the types of questions on both the SAT and ACT, and similar tests, previous preparation and education was necessary (mastery of skills) to complete the problems, and then the application of formulas and concepts was also necessary (intelligence).
4.  It depends on every case.  I believe that no average student could possibly fail a standardized test without a certain amount of preparation.

Mod 30

- Is test score pollution cheating? How do we fix this testing situation?

- Students have to completely trust that their teacher is giving them all they need to know to pass the test given by the state. Teachers don't know what is specifically on the test so they have to over prepare the kids. Principals have to trust that the teachers are being effective and covering what they need to cover or else their school's reputation is gone.

- High stakes tests are measuring the amount of the curriculum that the teacher has taught the student, not intelligence. You can't measure how intelligent a child is by testing them on something they might not even be taught.

- The problem is you don't know who's fault it is if a student failed. Maybe the teacher didn't teach them, maybe the student honestly has no motivation to learn or pass. I am from a high school that didn't make AYP for 3 years and I understand the strain it puts on everyone involved. In my situation, ultimately the community blamed it on the principal. Because of these problems, Georgia has a completely new math curriculum that is not working in the schools at all and has cost a ton of money for new text books and teacher training.

Module 30-Blog Post #1

Discuss one question or confusion you have from reading Module 30.

I’m a little confused about the No Child Left Behind act.

• Is it difficult for teachers to not teach to the test? I know that you shouldn’t but how do you teach a lesson without incorporating what is on the test?

I think that there certain tactics that teachers can take to “beat around the bush” with test questions when holding a review session or something like that for their students. They can review different test taking strategies that will help the students, for example, studying for multiple-choice questions as compared to short answer or essay questions. The two forms of testing require different study habits and teachers wouldn’t be spoiling the test questions by reviewing these aspects of test taking. Also, reviewing topics that might appear on the test is also an approach that doesn’t incorporate test questions/prompts, but prepares the students for the test material.

• What are some of the tensions that arise (for students, teacher, and schools) from high stakes standardized testing? Why do these arise?

Tensions arise because these high stake tests have a significant consequence toward the students, teachers and the schools as a whole. If testing scores aren’t up “to par”, schools usually think about replacing their teaching staff, either by firing and rehiring or dropping the course and teachers all together. This leads to upset teachers because they can obviously lose their job and the school’s reputation is then on the line for the community to hear and talk about. The students also feel tense about this kind of testing because it usually has a large effect on their future (college, scholarships, etc) and therefore may place tension in their home life because of money issues as well.

• What are high stakes tests measuring, exactly? Are they measuring intelligence or something else? How do you know?

High stake tests measure the performance of the teachers and schools more than the students’ individual intelligence. If the outcomes of these tests aren’t what is expected or hoped for, funds are cut and the teachers and schools end up looking like the “failures”. The teachers and schools are being held accountable for their skills when this test is being administered. It is also measuring how much funding or lack of funding a school will receive from year to year depending on the high or low scores that they receive. Since money is tight these days, teachers and schools rely on these tests to increase their bonuses and funding from year to year, which creates much tension as well.

• • If a student fails a standardized test (gets a 50% score), is it because of the test or the student? How do you know?

It is usually not due to the test or the student, but rather a possible negative instructional environment, test preparation, how the test is administered, possible cheating actions, emotional stability or if the student is at risk or not. The environment of the instruction could be negative because the teacher might “teach the test”, which is obviously unfair to other classes that teach the same material but don’t have that upper hand of knowing the test material before the test is administered. Schools with a large number of minority students usually end up scoring a lot lower than other students. Time limits and how the test is administered (computer, by hand, etc) can also affect the outcome of these tests. An obvious factor for increased test scores is cheating. Although we think of students cheating, it is shown that teachers are caught cheating just as much. This counts as reading answers to students or erasing a wrong answer and completing with the right one. Some students also suffer from test anxiety, especially in the older grades because testing becomes harder and their outlook on them becomes more and more negative. Some students struggle with motivation and discipline as compared to other students in their class as well. An obvious struggle with testing and scores are focused on students with disabilities or when English is a students’ second language because it takes them longer to process a prompt and produce an answer to the prompt.

Module 30

• Discuss one question or confusion you have from reading Module 30.

• Is it difficult for teachers to not teach to the test? I know that you shouldn’t but how do you teach a lesson without incorporating what is on the test?

• What are some of the tensions that arise (for students, teacher, and schools) from high stakes standardized testing? Why do these arise?

• There are many reasons why tension and anxiety arises from teachers, students and schools from high stakes standardized testing. The school has to worry about the test scores being publicized in local newspapers and if the test scores are not high enough they could lose the school districts funding. A couple of reasons why students feel anxiety from high stake standardized testing is because depending on if they pass or fail they may or may not graduate, move onto the next grade level or receive a certificate or license for entering a specific profession. Schools give teachers merit pay raises or bonuses if their students have demonstrated increased performance on standardized achievement tests, which can cause a lot of tension to arise. Another reason a teacher may feel anxious about testing is because their futures may be based on their students’ test scores. One major problem that may come out of this is teachers teaching to the test rather than sticking to their curriculum.

• What are high stakes tests measuring, exactly? Are they measuring intelligence or something else? How do you know?

• High stakes tests are measuring how well a school is doing with keeping all the students on remotely the same intelligence level. It not only shows if a teacher is doing his or her job correctly but it also demonstrates how well students are understanding the material they are learning. I do not think that high stakes tests are measuring intelligence because I do not believe that you can determine how intelligent someone is simply by giving them a test. Not only is it a test but it is a test that the majority of students feel very pressured to do well on. I know that I do not work well under pressure and high stakes tests were very difficult for me because my nerves would take over.

• If a student fails a standardized test (gets a 50% score), is it because of the test or the student? How do you know?

• This is a very difficult question because there are so many reasons to why a student may fail a standardized test. One great way to figure out the problem is to compare his or her test scores with the other students in the classroom. If he or she was the only one who failed then there is a good possibility that the student does not understand the material. But if you discover that not only did he or she fail but the entire class did then maybe the teacher is not doing their job as well as they thought.

Mod 30 Blog

Blog Post

• Discuss one question or confusion you have from reading Module 30.

I was confused about the test preparation part that said old exams are not to be given to students. I don’t understand why it is a bad thing. I think being able to see old exams would be beneficial so the student could see the format of the test and how the questions are asked, which can lower test anxiety. When I took the ACT in high school, we used practice exams to study which was very helpful, so why can’t students do that with these standardized tests?

• What are some of the tensions that arise (for students, teacher, and schools) from high stakes standardized testing? Why do these arise?

Tensions arise because these are very important tests that determine funding for the school as well as bonuses to teachers and publicity to the school if the school does well. However, serious consequences can be involved for schools that fail, including staff replacement and even total school takeover by the state. For teachers and the actual school, it can be very stressful, since they are not the ones actually taking these tests, the students are. They have to hope that they taught well enough that the students learned and can do well on the tests. Students can feel additional pressure from the school and teachers as well, causing anxiety.

• What are high stakes tests measuring, exactly? Are they measuring intelligence or something else? How do you know?

High stakes tests are measuring student performance in the curriculum from the given school. I don’t think results are measuring intelligence of any individual, but of the school as a whole. Not only is the student being assessed due to their scores, the teachers and entire school board can be too. You can’t really judge a student’s intelligence based on standardized tests because some people just don’t test well that way. I think it really just measures the amount of funding a school will get and just checking in to make sure it isn’t failing due to NCLB.

• If a student fails a standardized test (gets a 50% score), is it because of the test or the student? How do you know?

I don’t think it is possible to know. Some students know that a certain standardized test isn’t factored into their grade and it is just for the school, so they lack any motivation to care about it and just rush though it. Some students may just not know the information due to inadequate teaching or they are just not so good at taking tests. Maybe the test was written in a way that was confusing to the student, or the school board had put a lot of pressure on the students to do well which caused stress and anxiety. It is impossible to know the real reason since it could be so many as well as a combination.

Look at what you've made!

You should all be very happy with the great discussion we've had over the course of the semester. If you don't believe me, just look through some of the pages of the blog.... You can save the link to this site as a resource if you like. There is a lot of great discussion and creative insight here! --Jackie

Module 30 Post 1

- One question I had was how many different types of high-stake tests are given throughout the country, or within one state?

-Some issues that arise with teachers, schools, and for students when using high-stakes standardized tests could be test score pollution. This is define as when test scores are increased or decreased due to factors that are unrelated to what the test was actually intended to measure. These problems can arise because the results may not be accurately being portrayed. The results may not be portraying what the students have learned in school throughout the year. One negatively influenced way to have scores be skewed is if the teacher "teaches the test". Then students will know exactly what is on the test and it won't be testing if the school is actually doing a good job teaching students material throughout the course of an entire year. These problems arise because some schools need the state funding and if their score are below average they may not receive the money that they need.

-High-stakes tests are tests that are given within a state to see if students are learning what they should be each year in school. They go over subjects that each student in the corresponding grade should be able to do. This is to make sure that each student throughout the state is learning the same information and are being taught the same things. They are not measuring intelligence. They are measuring if the students are being taught the correct things. Because if the students learn all the information on the test in the classroom, then they should all be knowledgeable and do fine on the test.

-If a student fails a test it maybe the test or the student. The test may not have covered the material that the teacher taught in the classroom. Therefore, they did poorly on it. Also, if the student has a learning disability that was not made aware of then they might do poorly on the test as well. The test may also may not be credible, accurate, or have strong validity, which could make the student perform poorly.

module 30 post 1

If they weren’t to have a standardized test, then what would be a fair way of testing students? I don’t like standardized tests because I know that some students aren’t very good at taking tests and it’s difficult to judge a student’s ability based on an exam. However, how would you be able to test a student’s ability fairly against another student from a different school/state without a standardized test?

The high-stakes test put a lot of pressure on students because many of the test scores are linked to possible grade promotion, graduation, and the scores can determine which colleges you’ll be accepted to. The tests hold teachers and school districts accountable for the students’ performance. The results are published and the scores will reflect the school’s performance and teaching abilities. Teachers can receive bonuses or pay raises if their students show increased performance on tests. This creates a problem in some instances because teachers begin to teach classes just to prepare the students for an exam. Furthermore, decisions about a teachers’ future employment can sometimes be based on a students’ standardized achievement test scores. A lot can depend on a standardized test for a school (such as funding, merit, etc.). If the school doesn’t have good test scores, it could be thought of as a failing school or a school that will not provide a good education for children.

A high-stakes test is a test that has a significant consequence for the students, teachers, administrators, or school. These tests can evaluate the level of student learning as a means to gather information about possible changes needed in the curriculum or the teaching methods. Perhaps the teaching methods can be changed to improve student learning. I believe that the tests are looking to assess a student’s achievement in various subjects to see whether they have mastered the material they are supposed to be learning. However, the test scores are not always an accurate reflection of a student’s ability.

I feel like if a student fails a test then it could be because of either the test or the student. Perhaps the student hasn’t learned the material because the school/teacher didn’t teach it to them. Or perhaps the student isn’t a very good test-taker. Some students get very nervous when taking exams and experience anxiety. Furthermore, there can also be instances of test fairness and test bias. Test fairness addresses the ethical use of tests, while test bias looks at a systematic error in test scores that could be caused by cultural variations. Research seems to think that cultural test bias does not exist in most standardized tests. Also, some students may be better at writing out material or taking an oral exam, as compared to taking a long, multiple-choice exam. Perhaps the student knows the information but cannot explain his/her knowledge based on the structure of the exam they are taking.

Blog Post, Standardized Testing

First of all, I thought you all might find this article interesting. It has to do with the subject at hand.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/when-an-adult-took-standardized-tests-forced-on-kids/2011/12/05/gIQApTDuUO_blog.html

One question I have is about the NCLB act. Can it ever be changed? As in, can a future president do something to change the laws so that some of these problems can be resolved? And if they can, why haven't they yet? I know many teachers who have numerous issues with NCLB (especially in regards to minorities and disabilities). Can anything be done to change this?

"Teaching the test" is a definite tension that occurs as a result of standardized testing. Unfortunately, it makes sense - schools want better funding, teachers want raises, and students want to pass, so teachers focus on the test material and not other important material, which narrows the curriculum and leaves students learning a lot less than they should. As far as other tensions? Schools with minorities, a lot of disabled students, or a school in a high poverty area all have some real issues with standardized testing that could create a lot of tension. As the book explains , the mean score is used, which means there is a bias towards these schools. Also, cheating is a tension that occurs - not only with students, but with teachers. I can definitely see a situation where a teacher really wants a raise, so he or she cheats.

High stake tests are defined as "tests that have significant consequences for students, teachers, administrators, or schools". It's hard to define what they are measuring, but personally, I really don't think they're measuring intelligence. There are a lot of different kinds of intelligences (Gardner's theory), and ways to measure intelligence besides a simple test. Frankly, some students are poor test takers. In fact, one of the most intelligent girls in my high school got a pretty low score on the ACT because she was really stressed about it, and it affected her performance. I think the tests for NCLB are meant to evaluate not only the students, but the school district in general - the teachers, the principal, the resources available to the students, etc. Does the test necessarily do that? Who knows. Other standardized tests, such as the ACT, are more directly supposed to measure student performance, but once again, whether or not they actually do is a gray area.

This question (why a student fails a test - the test or the student) is one of the hardest questions a teacher can ask - not only for standardized tests, but tests in general. Sure, sometimes students are to blame. Maybe they do struggle with the material at hand, maybe they aren't as "intelligent" as other students. There are SO MANY reasons a student doesn't do as well on a test as others, and I don't think it's fair to just assume the reason why they failed is the student. First of all, tests can be unfair. They can be biased, they can be too hard, they can cover information the student hasn't learned (which is the fault of the teacher perhaps). And if the reason is the student, there could be numerous subcategories there as well. Maybe the student didn't get very much sleep because they had to take care of their little siblings. Maybe the student just isn't a good test taker. Maybe the student comes from a background that doesn't value academics, and therefore didn't try on the test even though they would have succeeded if they did try. It's so hard to truly know who's fault it is, but I definitely don't think anyone should attempt to blame the student without proper knowledge of the situation and the test.

Blog Post Module 30

-How can test score pollution occur if the scores are systematically changed by factors that aren't being measured by the test? I don't understand how factors not measured by the test can affect the outcomes of the scores.

-There are many tensions that may arise through the use of standardized testing. The most common of these is innapropriate pressure to perform sent down the school corporation hierarchy. Government officials want better test scores so that they can have a reason to keep funding school corporations with tax dollars. This leads to pressure on administrators that passes to teachers that then passes on to the students. Some tensions that may arise from this trickling effect is the tension caused by pressure to perform rather than learn. Students are being taught to pass a test instead of being taught to learn new material.

-High stakes test are measuring more of a teacher's ability to get students to memorize certain information that they know will be on a test. It does not truly test intelligence because it is not presenting students with things to learn. As mentioned in the previous point, it is encouraging teachers to teach to the test rather than for the sake of improving students' intelligence.

-If a student fails a standardized test, it could be for a number of reasons. It is impossible to pinpoint a single reason why a student was unable to pass a test. The test might not be an accurate measure of the material that was supposed to be learned or there could be a variety of other factors affecting the score of the student. These could range from lack of work ethic to a hard home life to not having the resources to study properly. It is impossible to truly tell whether it is the fault of the student or the test or even the teacher if a student fails a test.

Module 30: Blog Post

· Discuss one question or confusion you have from reading Module 30.

The book says the second wave of testing started in 1983 so was there not very many standardized tests up until this point? I assumed standardized testing had always been a part of education, because it has for my entire life, so I found it interested to read that a lot of the standardized testing is more recent.

· What are some of the tensions that arise (for students, teacher, and schools) from high stakes standardized testing? Why do these arise?

For teachers, some change their instructional environment where they “teach to the test” because they feel so much pressure to make sure that there students are prepared for the tests, and do well on the tests. Some teachers will give students a previously used test to familiarize them with the test, but that is unethical. Obviously, some teachers and students will cheat. Teachers will cheat to satisfy the public and the legislators. Some students have test anxiety which affects their scores. Students at risk, students with disabilities or limited English proficiency are also likely to decrease the school’s scores so schools may give special accommodations to these students. However, some schools give students accommodations that are unethical.

· What are high stakes tests measuring, exactly? Are they measuring intelligence or something else? How do you know?

Before reading this chapter, I would have answered with no doubt that these tests are measuring something else like how well students can take tests. After reading this chapter, I’m not sure if this is a trick question or not. I think that these tests are intended to measure intelligence, but that the test validity is not there. The tests try to measure overall intelligence, but personally I don’t think that can be done with a test and a numerical score value. For example, the SAT is supposed to measure literacy, writing and math skills needed in college, and a student receives a numerical score. I didn’t do well on my SAT’s; I have test anxiety and have never done too well on standardized testing. I was accepted into IU through the Groups program, which has their own admission standards, but I have almost all A’s and have a high GPA. Tests like the SAT can make students think they are or are not smart and that alone can limit a student’s potential and motivation.

· If a student fails a standardized test (gets a 50% score), is it because of the test or the student? How do you know?

It depends on the situation. As the book noted some students (like myself) have test anxiety and this alone can be the reason a student fails a test. If the test is not valid, then the student failed because of the test. If the test is not fair or bias, then it could also be the fault of the test. I’m assuming there is no one right answer to this question and that it really does depend upon the test and the student. One would know if it is because of the test or the student by examining the test in detail and by knowing a student’s attitude, motivation, and anxiety about tests among other characteristics.