Failed Tests

[LWolf]

Failed testing
Making tests public will reveal flaws

News-Journal editorial

http://www.news-journalonline.com/NewsJournalOnline/Opinion/Editorials/03OpOP01081803.htm

<snip>

The testing game is a sham. And it's time to expose it.

Make the results of the tests public, as a group of Florida parents are demanding.

Gov. Jeb Bush maintains that the tests can't be made public because they would then not be able to use the tests again. That dodges the issue. The aim of testing should not be to preserve the integrity of tests but to ensure that each child receives an adequate education.

Corporations who make the tests may disagree, too, claiming it would be too expensive. But their motive is profit. States can lead the way to a solution by requiring manufacturers to create tests that can be rotated and whose results can be shown to teachers and parents. Making the tests public would hold the testing industry accountable. Making the test public would expose the exam's weak points. Questions that are poorly worded or otherwise flawed would be known -- and presumably have a better chance of being corrected. Improper scoring could be discovered quickly and corrected.

Making the tests public would enable teachers and parents to understand the test and provide help for children precisely where it is needed. In order to improve, students need to know what went wrong. It would also help schools focus on programs that work. It could refocus the objective of testing on its original design -- to help students learn better.

The alternative is to continue to climb the stairs of high-stakes testing and leave all children in public schools behind.

[Kellanved]

1. "not be able to use the tests again" ?

:wtf:


The questions will make their way anyways - using questions again is one of the dumbest ideas ever.

Sounds a little like the Japanese system, where nobody listens, because the questions haven't changed for decades.

[LWolf]

2. These sorts of tests use the exact same test

over and over; at least they are supposed to. They are "standardized" and scores can be compared because it is the same test, given the same way, every time. When we proctor a test, we have to read a script; we are not allowed to modify the scripted instructions or procedures in any way.

If we were to give tests that just scored kids on how much they had learned, we wouldn't have to give the same test every time because the point of the test wouldn't be to compare children to each other, but to determine how much they had learned. Publicizing the tests would still be expensive, because the test questions would have to vary from year to year.

I think we could compromise by having tests generate questions randomly from an available bank of questions; that way, no one person would see all the questions, and no tester/test taker would know which particular questions would appear on the test.

If we have to compare and rank kids/schools (which I don't think we should do), we could test sample groups; sort of like a poll to guage what's going on; not every kid needs to take the test, just like not every American needs to answer every poll question. That would give you a reasonably accurate picture, and save hords of $$$$ to spend on actual teaching!