Although this article I found deals with an elementary school, the argument that it makes is certainly an interesting one to consider in the debate about standardized testing.
Robert F. Kennedy Elementary School in Elmhurst, Rhode Island actually views their state-wide standardized testing as a competition against the “test-makers”. The school holds a pep-rally to get students excited about “defeating” the test, and students are rewarded with incentives for diligent work on the tests and attendance throughout the week. Teachers value teaching to the test and believe that this is their role as teachers in their state. This article is an interesting counterpoint to the articles I’ve encountered throughout the semester thus far.
School’s Focus on Small Things Pays Off Big
By Linda Borg, journalist
The Providence Journal
February 2, 2007Kennedy principal Gina Picard attributes her school’s success to a number of ingredients: getting children to feel more comfortable with the test, analyzing previous test data to pinpoint strengths and weaknesses and getting parents more involved in their child’s learning.
One of the biggest stumbling blocks, she said, had little to do with instruction.
“Our students,” she said, “were nervous about taking the test.”
The state testing takes place over two weeks and each segment lasts 90 minutes. That, Picard said, puts a lot of pressure on children who are 6, 7 and 8 years old. So Picard and her staff came up with some ideas to make testing less of a burden. They held a pep rally and offered incentives, from Frisbees to longer recess periods, if children made a real effort on the assessments. Any class with a perfect attendance during the testing period was rewarded with an ice cream party.
“We did a lot of test preparation to relieve anxiety,” said Maria Laurenzo, a sixth grade teacher. “The kids seemed to take the test more seriously this year.”
“The whole idea is to beat the test-makers,” said a third grade teacher, Kendra Haggerty. ‘I tell my kids, ‘You can do it.’ ”
Asked if this amounted to “teaching to the test,” which is a common criticism of schools with high-stakes exit exams, Picard said no.
“If we’re not teaching what we’re assessing, then what are we doing?”
Like I stated above, I think this is an interesting angle to take on the standardized testing debate. These teachers seem to feel like “teaching to the test” is their duty as teachers. After all, most students are going to be tested and assessed through standardized tests whether their teacher agrees with it or not. As a high school English teacher, I wonder if getting students “excited” about the MEAP is even possible.
I believe that creating this positive spin on testing could possibly raise students’ achievement if they are in a state that mandates standardized testing. I know that throughout my K-12 school career, my teachers openly voiced how “stupid” they thought the MEAP test was and how they hated “teaching to the test.” There would be days where they would specifically say, “Now, I don’t really want to teach you this because you’ll never use it again, but I have to—it’s going to be on the MEAP, so pay attention.” Ha—why would statements like that encourage students to pay attention, retain the information, and apply it on the test three months later? I don’t think it does. I think if my teachers had attempted to shed a more positive light onto standardized testing, regardless of their personal opinion, my classmates and I may have actually performed better.
By no means am I saying that I agree with “teaching to the test” or that I’m going to award my high school juniors with ice cream parties for working hard on the MEAP test; however, I do think that students are going to react to testing in much the same attitude as the one their teacher presents to them about testing. With that in mind, when I become a teacher I’m sure there are going to be times when I have to teach some information so students will be better prepared for some sort of standardized test. Instead of blatantly stating that I think testing is “stupid” and that this information isn’t my idea of English literature instruction—it’s simply to prepare students for the MEAP, I will try my hardest to integrate the material into creative lessons where students will feel encouraged to learn the material.
I think this article provides an interesting attitude about testing: if we have to teach students information that they’re going to be tested on, why not relieve some of the stress, offer some incentives, and prepare students to the best of our ability? All of these are interesting points to ponder…
Teaching to the test does seem to be a common mistake that a lot of primary school teachers seem to make. Teachers become so concerned with fulfilling standards that are set by the state that they don’t realize that the students aren’t receiving as good of an education as they would normally. It’s important to meet the standards, as they were put there for a purpose, but I feel that the standards can be met without teachers putting so much emphasis on reaching those standards. If teachers just teach what they know students will respond to, the standards will be taught.