There’s No Such Thing As a Dumb Child
Sorry it’s been a while – I’ve been busy! So many things happening at home and school, I’ve hardly had time to sleep – let alone blog – but I’m here now, and as always, there’s something on my mind….
I’ve been talking to a lot of people lately about my teaching philosophy and how I try to reach my students. Basically the same stuff I ramble on and on about here. Add that to the fact that I’m in the middle of PAT’s (Provincial Achievement Testing – Alberta’s standardized tests performed in grade 3, 6, and 9) and I always end up on the same thought. Why do we keep putting our kids through this?
These tests don’t accurately assess everyone. As always I had kids score higher then normal due to lucky guesses, and others score lower due to – well, you name it – test anxieties, problems at home, hang nails, take your pick.
Now I understand the reasons for these tests. The government needs some way to ensure that our kids are learning and growing, and to have proof so that they can be accountable to the general public. And conducting these types of test are time consuming and expensive – so a one shot deal every three years is all you get. I understand that. But it’s what we do with the results that bothers me….
Quite often schools and classes become “ranked” based on these test scores. Here in Edmonton a list is published every year in the local paper. It lists schools in order, from the schools that scored the highest to those that score the lowest. Does that mean the teachers in the lower socio-economic areas should all be fired because their test scores were so low? That Johnny is dumb because he was more worried about filling his belly than answering a question? Please – don’t miss understand me – I know that’s not going to happen, and most people take those kinds of things into consideration when viewing those results – but not everyone. And not everyone has access to all the demographics of a school.
Take my school for instance. We have 3 different programs at Meyokumin. First we have mainstream – regular public school. Kids from all walks of life and ability who live in the neighbourhood. Next we have Strategies – “normal” kids who for some reason are functioning a year or two below grade level. They have smaller classes and aide time to try and help them “catch up” quickly and re-enter mainstream. And then we have Cogito. This program focuses a lot on wrote memorization, as well as linguistic and logical intelligences (as defined by Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences). When looking at the test results typically the Cogito students do better then everyone else, with the mainstream in second, and the Strategies students in third. Does this mean that Cogito is the better program? No, just that the tests that are given are better suited to their style of learning. I’ve seen Strategies students that could run mental circles around some of the Cogitos, and vice versa. But this doesn’t always show up on the tests.
And most people don’t know (or care) which programs are at which schools in what quantity. Just where they end up in the rankings. I have a huge personal problem with this.
There is no such thing as a dumb child. Everyone has something they can do well. In my class I have a “coded” student. We’ll call this student Pat. Pat’s educational label is Opportunity. Pat’s IQ is below normal and is currently working below grade level. But Pat can dance… and dance and dance. I love watching Pat. But the PAT’s don’t measure dancing ability. Dancers can make good money – great money in fact – but our schools aren’t ranked by it.
What about artists? In Edmonton we have many schools that have a huge focus on fine arts. The National Gallery of Canada paid $1.8 million for a painting called Voice of Fire. But artistic ability isn’t included on the PATs.
What about musicians? How about leadership ability? Organizational skills? According to Gardiner these are all valid “intelligences”. These are all ways in which our children can be (and are) smart. I point this out to my students on almost a daily basis – that they all have strengths – and even though they might not come across on a paper and pencil exam, they can use these strengths to become successful. They just have to believe in those strengths, and themselves.
I feel that exams like the PATs can sometimes do more harm than good. It takes the attention off all the possible ways that a student can show how smart they are, and focuses on those that are quick and cost efficient to evaluate. Now to be fair I know Alberta Education has in the past experimented with other testing procedures – to try and find more ways for students to prove their knowledge – but in the end they were too costly and difficult to assess. They did try though.
I understand why the tests exist. I know that when looked at properly with all the relevant data, a lot can be learned from these exams. But when they are used to rank and rate students, teachers, and schools… that’s where I draw the line.
But that’s just my opinion. What do you think? Is standardized testing a valid way to asses our students. Is a series of 2-6 exams given over a period of one month sufficient? And what do we do if a child doesn’t reach the provincial standards? What if they never will – when tested in this particular manner? I know there are no easy answers… but I’m curious about your thoughts….
For the record:
I personally have helped write questions for the PATs in the past. I do understand the value of them, I just wish people would make sure they looked at the information in context. All assessment can be valuable – we just need to be aware that no one form of assessment can tell us everything we need to know about a child.
Wow! This is a hot topic with me! As a Strategies teacher, I know I’m teaching very intelligent students that have just come across difficulties in their learning. I also understand the incredible amount of baggage some kids come with on their backs when they come into the classroom. And if it were just for results on the provincial achievement tests that determined my students ability (let alone the status of my job), we would all fail! The tests are mostly multiple choice which really actually focus on reading comprehension skills – the exact problem most of my students suffer from. Sit back and hold a conversation with them and you will find yourself delving much deeper into issues and ideas than you would with most kids their age. Add to that I am positive my students will grow up to be successful contributing members of our society. But, the dreaded achievement exams show themselves every year, and my students and I all lose sleep just worrying about how we will appear to the rest of the world. Is this a fair stress to place upon them or their teachers? I have heard horror stories of school boards that actually pay their teachers in relation to how their students achieve on board exams. Nobody would want to teach anything but the quickest and swiftest learners! I know my students are very intelligent, but just need to show their colors in other ways. On the other hand I know, practically speaking, projects that appeal to the multiple intelligences would take far too much time and money to try to compile and compare. But I really feel that the tests the students have to take are very unfair. It is not that my students do not know the information that is being tested, it is that they process it differently and must show it differently. However, the tests are reality. So, we do what we can, and sadly “teach to the test” which is so against my teaching philosophy. I resort to teaching the kids “good test taking skills” which really means they hardly have to know what they are being tested on, and then practice, practice, practice old tests. What does all that really prove? Hardly how good a learner each one is, or how well they can memorize facts. I don’t know what the answer is, but it seems that the provincial exams are not collecting the true information they are setting out to find.
However Lisa, very compelling arguments can be made for teaching test wiseness – and how that helps develop critical thinking skills. It’s the rumoured cases where there is more then just teaching to the test that worries me. The stories of the teacher who looks at each student’s work as asks “are you sure about that?” or the “approved” reader who uses inflection to help a student. I’ve even heard of cases where “at risk” students get “special” supervision during the exams. It’s cases and abuses like this that invalidate the whole process. Yes we get our numbers up – but if the numbers are false, then what good are they?
Like you, I do see both sides of this coin.
On the one hand, accountability measures are a part of life and especially a part of government. It provides data for everyone involved which can then be used in planning and budgeting. In addition, it can be used to help kids get the help they need. For example, if a child tests 2 grade levels below their peers, the PAT data can be used as evidence for providing extra educational support for that child. Finally, as a teacher I must admit that when I taught PAT grades I made absolutely sure that I covered every stitch of the curriculum, and the reality is that when I did not teach PAT grades, I did not focus as much on covering every single outcome. Perhaps I should have, but I did not. Human nature has taught me that we all need accountability measures. When you know there won’t be a police car on the freeway, it’s a bit easier to press harder on the gas on the way home from work than when you know there will be photo radar, right? Not that teachers in non-PAT grades are slackers by any means – it just focuses a person sometimes.
That all said, I never enjoyed teaching LESS than when I was teaching for the PATs. As much as I loved teaching grade 6 students, it was excruciating and highly stressful in terms of the pressure I put on myself and the kids to perform on those exams. And this was in a school where I had a great principal and supportive parent group – imagine how much worse it could have been for me, not to mention for the kids! My son has a diagnosed learning disability and his grade 3 PATs further reinforced in his own mind his lack of abilities. The grade 3 teacher aligned many of her report card descriptors with grade 3 standards consistent with the PATs, not with what my son was capable of doing. Therefore, the report card and the PAT results told us more about what he could NOT do than what he COULD do or what his strengths were.
I have never enjoyed teaching more than when I left the PAT grades because my focus shifted from the practice exams and the curriculum documents to creating meaningful, stimulating, engaging learning experiences for my students. It is very difficult to focus on both of these aspects which, for me were at opposite ends of the educational spectrum.
Like you Shane, I see merit in the PAT tests for what they are, and roll my eyes when the results are pubished in the newspaper for the entire province to misinterpret. I wish that different, more meaningful measures of accountability and student achievement would be investigated, but the fact is that this would likely be very cost prohibitive and politically risky for it to ever happen. I admire those in the profession who can teach the way they’ve always taught and not worry about the exams, because I never could.