The Myths of Standardized Tests

1. The Myths of Standardized Tests Why They Don’t Tell You What You Think They Do Phillip & Joan Harris www.themythsofstandardizedtests.com

2. Purpose of our Presentation • To explain why standardized tests are inappropriate to evaluate student learning, teacher effectiveness and district quality.

3. Historical Perspective of Testing • An overview of how we got here • Beginnings of testing (ESEA) • Minimum Competency • National standards/state tests • No Child Left Behind/Blueprint

4. The Test • Student knowledge can be assessed by a limited number of questions in a limited amount of time. • Student achievement/learning can be measured by scores on standardized tests. • Tests are objective and the numbers are thought to be absolute. • Test scores provide citizens the information they need to know about their schools.

5. Uses • Punishment and rewards motivate people. • High stakes improve performance. • An indirect measure of knowledge or skill (test) is better than a direct measure (actual performance). • Tests predict future success in school and in life. • Student test scores can be used to evaluate teachers.

6. The Big Picture • Confusion about accountability and evaluation. • Accountability is about transparency. • Evaluation is what policymakers mean when they say accountability.

7. Equity • Whatever equity issues there are, they weren’t caused by the public education system. • How tests are designed. • Sampling • Norm Referencing • Cut Scores • We can’t achieve equity if the “measuring device” is flawed.

8. Approaching Equity • If we want to have all children reach the same standard we need to vary time, methods, and resources. • If we are really committed to having all children achieve at a similar level we need to understand how children learn and the conditions needed for learning to occur.

9. Action Plan • Become informed about Standardized Tests that are used to make decisions in classrooms, schools, and states. • Demand that the purpose of state assessment be made public. • Become aware of the differences between accountability and evaluation. • Be a part of the conversation to discuss the purpose of public education.

10. Bibliography • Harris, Phillip, Bruce M. Smith, and Joan Harris. The Myths of Standardized Tests: Why They Don’t Tell You What You Think They Do. Lanham, Md., Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. •  Koretz, Daniel. Measuring Up: What Educational Testing Really Tells Us. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2008. •  Popham, W. James, The Truth About Testing: An Educator’s Call to Action. Alexandria, Va.: ASCD, 2001. Transformative Assessment. Alexandria, Va.: ASCD, 2008. • Nichols, Sharon L. and David C. Berliner. Collateral Damage: How High-Stakes Testing Corrupts America’s Schools. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard Education Press, 2007. • Rothstein, Richard, with Rebecca Jacobsen and Tamara Wilder. Grading Education: Getting Accountability Right. New York: Teachers College Press, 2008. • Kohn, Alfie, The Case Against Standardized Testing. Heinemann, 2000. Bonus • A defense against the darks arts of value-added measurement. John Ewing, “Mathematical Intimidation: Driven by Data,”Notices of the AMS (American Mathematical Society), May 2011, pp. 667--73. http://www.ams.org/notices/201105/rtx110500667p.pdf

11. FINISHED FILES ARE THE RE- SULT OF YEARS OF SCIENTIF- IC STUDY COMBINED WITH THE EXPERIENCE OF MANY YEARS.