History of Anemic Progress of English Language Learners on State Accountability Tests

1. History of Anemic Progress of English Language Learners on State Accountability Tests Manuel Barrera, PhD Associate Professor, Metropolitan State University; Research Associate, National Center on Educational Outcomes, University of Minnesota First presented at Free Minds, Free People Conference, Chicago, Illinois July 11, 2013

2. Three Points • Historical results of state accountability testing with specific case of MN • Convolution of Summative testing to make formative decisions • The case for a return to classroom-based assessment, especially for English language learners and students with disabilities

3. Historical Results of State Testing • For students of color, ELLs, and students with disabilities: • Chronic Failure Across Years, Across Tests, Across States • Persistent Academic Disparity • $Millions spent to demonstrate the obvious: Children of color, English language learners and students with disabilities do worse than their White peers • For White students: • Despite doing better than their non-White peers, demonstrate persistently low performance than their “advantages” would seem to dictate, especially in mathematics and science • Charter Schools are the Worst

4. MN Reading Results by Major Groups 2008 (publically accessible data)

5. 10th grade Passing Rates on MN Reading 2005-2008(publically accessible data)

6. MN Charter School 10th grade Reading Passing Rates (publically accessible data)

7. Summative Testing as Formative Assessment • Successive Administrations’ Policy: • State tests can be used to help determine educational improvements based on “data-based decision-making” • Teachers can use state tests as a way to determine how to teach students • Teacher “merit” can be determined by progress on state tests and improvement based on improved test results

8. Basics of Standardized Tests • Designed to provide stable results over time: all 5th graders should perform, on average, at a 5th grade level when they are 5th graders • “Average” is the observed Mean of scores when a test is given, which means exactly ½ of all students tested lower and ½ tested higher: a score within 1 standard deviation from the mean on either side represents 64% of all scores. “Normal” is considered to be within 2 SD of the mean • An average score can “bleed” into other average scores across grades

9. Basics II • The average score is not actually the “passing score” (e.g., “partially met” vs. “met” standard) • State tests are explained based on varying and often opposed “derived” scores (e.g., a percentile rank, a percent score, a standard “z” or “T” score, or a stanine) • None of these score is actually used to determine “passing”, which is often a taskforce of experts’ or more aptly, a political, decision known as a “cut score” • In short, these scores are Summative (How did they do?) not Formative (what explains the results?). • Hence, none of these interpreted scores provides relevant information for guiding instruction nor determining program changes

10. Classroom-based Assessment • Analyze what students know now and determine what they need to know to learn what I am going to teach. • Teach that • What did I teach and how did I teach it? • Informs what I should test and how to test it? • Measure progress on what was taught and the skills needed to learn it. • Provide individual student progress and teach students how to monitor their own progress

11. Improved Classroom Assessment and Instruction Cost Money • What you need • More Teachers • More resources—including technology and teacher support personnel • Fewer students per class • More student support including community supports • More professional development • Better leadership development (as opposed to better “administrators”)

12. It All Costs LESS than Current Policies • It All Costs LESS Than Spending on Tests That Tell You NOTHING about the problems and then sending students into the “prison-industrial complex” • It Costs Less than funding the worst kind of schooling, charter schooling • It Cost Less to Make Less Violent Individuals in a Less Violent Society Than to Produce Wars where violent individuals can play out their fantasies

13. LanguagePolicy is a Social Policy • Testing policy of learners who we already know will not do well on an English test is social violence • It produces violence in retaliation • Supporting different languages of learners and communities creates the best potential for creating multicultural integration and human interactions • No More Useless and Inappropriate Tests; More Teaching that facilitates learning