Tag Archives: Testing

Does This Sound Like YOUR School?

This is the worst time of the school year for me.  

That’s because we are in the middle of the long slog to the End of Grade Exams — a series of high stakes tests that, at least here in North Carolina, are used to rate and evaluate everyone and everything connected with public education.

What’s crazy to me, though, is the VAST majority of the content assessed on our end of grade exams — particularly in social studies and science — is content that can be Googled.

(click here to view image and credits on Flickr)

Slide - Taught In Schools

Need some examples?

My students will need to know the difference between intrusive and extrusive igneous rocks, the difference between longitudinal and transverse waves, and the impact that density has on both light and sound.  They’ll need to be able to name both the male and female parts of plants, explain the difference between atoms and elements, and identify chemical and physical properties of matter.

They’ll be asked about the reasons for the seasons, the reason for eclipses, and the reason for tides.  They’ll have to know the layers of the earth and the characteristics of habitable planets.  They’ll see questions about the focus and epicenter of earthquakes, the compressions and rarefactions in sound waves, and the lens and cornea in your eyes.

Should I keep going?

Now don’t get me wrong:  I understand the importance of having foundational knowledge about essential content.  It’s impossible to make new discoveries when you have no basic understanding of what’s happening in the world around you — and while it’s POSSIBLE to Google darn near everything in our required curriculum, it’s also incredibly inefficient and time consuming.  Fluency with core ideas matters.

But it’s also important to understand that by tying high stakes tests to mastery of basic facts, we are fundamentally changing what happens in the science classroom.

As a teacher, I’m forced into making a decision between spending class time on wondering and investigation and collaboration OR spending class time covering as many basic facts as possible.  Choose the former, and I’ll have students who are better prepared to be the kind of inquisitive scientists who make important discoveries that change the world.  Choose the latter and I’ll have students who are better prepared to pass our state’s standardized exams.

I know what you are thinking, y’all:  Why can’t you do both?  Why can’t you integrate inquiry into classrooms where students ALSO walk away with a solid understanding of basic facts?

The answer is you can — as long as the list of “basic facts” that kids are expected to know is manageable.  And at least now — in North Carolina — that’s not the case.  Our essential curriculum is massive and unmanageable.

That has to change.

#trudatchat


Related Radical Reads:

Making Room for Uncertainty in the Required Curriculum

Walking Moral Tightropes ISN’T a Reform Strategy

How Testing Will Change What I Teach Next Year

 

I Support Kyle Williams for Secretary of Education.

Yup.  THAT Kyle Williams.  Defensive Tackle for the Buffalo Bills:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Image licensed Creative Commons Attribution by Jeffrey Beall)

Now I know what you are thinking:  Why the HECK would we ever want to name an NFL player to such an important position in the federal government?  How is THAT guy qualified?

My snarky answer:  “Come ON.  Qualifications?  Did you see who we elected president?”

(I didn’t say that out loud, did I?)

But if you’re the kind of person that IS all hung up on qualifications, check out how Williams — an impact player for the Bills for over a decade who wasn’t given much of a chance at a meaningful career when he was drafted out of LSU in 2006 because his arms weren’t as long as they were supposed to be to play defensive tackle in the NFL — described the role that metrics should play in judging NFL prospects in a recent interview with the Buffalo News:

“So I really didn’t much care what anybody’s opinion was about whether I could or couldn’t play because nobody else knew. ‘All right, well, his arms are an inch and a half short.’ There’s a lot more involved in this game you can’t measure than what you can. That’s what makes players great. What gives guys longevity are the things they can’t put their finger on or put their stopwatch to.”

Williams is right, isn’t he?  Success in the NFL isn’t dependent on the length of  some guy’s arms.  But as ridiculous as that may sound, that’s EXACTLY why Williams slipped to the fifth round in the draft. 

Now translate that argument to education.  In our quest to rank and sort and rate schools and teachers and kids, we’ve put a hell of a lot of weight on metrics (read:  standardized test scores).  We celebrate schools and teachers and kids who do well on those metrics — and we shame and punish those who don’t.  But ask ANYONE with common sense and a bit of experience and they can give you a LIST of schools and teachers and students who were remarkably successful in spite of their “scores.”  Better yet, they can also give you a LIST of schools and teachers and students who earned the highest marks but were complete failures.

So what’s my point?  

Simple:  There’s a lot more involved in OUR game that you can’t measure than what you can.  What’s more, the things that make schools and teachers and kids great are rarely measurable — and the things we CAN measure aren’t all that important.

That’s a message that every #edpolicy maker needs to hear if we are going to create the kinds of learning spaces that students deserve.

#trudatchat

#gobills

————————

Related Radical Reads:

Lessons Schools Can Learn from the Pittsburgh Steelers

I Wouldn’t Want to Work with Walter Payton.

Lessons #edpolicy Nation Can Learn from Andrew Luck