To Test or Not to Test???

[Russ]

I'm curious about the opinions and views of traditional testing. Here
are some thoughts to start the discussion:

To test or not to test? This is the question that keeps coming to me.
It is the ultimate question derived from a series of questions
regarding assessments, particularly traditional testing. What other
questions do I ask myself? Why do we test? What is the fundamental
purpose of traditional testing? What skills does traditional testing
assess? Does it serve students or teachers? Is it the best way for
students to review, organize and synthesize unit material? Is it a
good way for students to review, organize and synthesize unit material?
Other questions lend themselves for consideration n this matter, but
these considerations can be addressed in the process of examining these
core questions.

Why do we test? This is the question that has my head spinning, not
because I do not know the answer, but, because I am not sure the answer
is satisfactory. As far as I can tell, tests are designed to be a
measurement of what each student has learned for a given unit. It
offers an opportunity to put a quantitative score, thus seeming
scientific, to that measurement. I use quantitative to include raw
scores, percentages, and letter grades, even if the letter grade is
derived from a subjective review. With the quantitative measurement
established, students can be ranked from highest to lowest achiever.
This seems to satisfy the bureaucratic necessities of a school, a board
of education and/or school board, whether public or private. Results
can then be compared between student peers, between year-to-year within
the same school, school-to-school with the same district or category,
school-to-school from region to region. This provides various
bureaucrats to make measurements based upon the same comparative
criteria as a means to answer the question-"How are we doing?"
That answer can be stated another way as well-"How good are we?"
It also provides a tool for universities to select those deemed worthy
for admission or unworthy to justify rejection. Nowhere among these
questions does there seem to be concern about students as individuals
or the true quality of what has or has not been learned. Why should
education be competitive? Education is for all and benefits all, both
in the sense of all individuals and in terms of the community.

What is the fundamental purpose of testing? By fundamental purpose, I
refer to the stated means of testing in relation to student learning.
Testing, in this sense, is designed to make students take stock of all
pertinent material related to a given unit. It is a review of
accumulated information and to do so with a critical eye. The goal is
for students to put all of the pieces together in a cohesive and
coherent manner in preparation for a question or series of questions,
which they do not know of in advance, designed to examine or assess the
breadth and depth of understanding. However, a test can also be a
trial. Is the purpose then to determine whether a student is worthy of
recognition/advancement, guilty or innocent of ignorance? If the
purpose of a test is to sum up or wrap up a panoply of knowledge and
understanding, it should not be necessary to explore the extent of a
student's learning under such a system. What is really being tested?
Is it a student point-of-view or a teacher point-of-view? Are student
telling us what they know or what we want to know? If it is this, then
we must deal with the reality of students trying to anticipate what
they think we want to hear and not really seeking or preparing for true
knowledge and understanding.

Is there better ways for students to organize and interpret what they
have learned? As a teacher of History and Humanities, writing is a
crucial skill necessary for every student to possess and work towards
improving. Can unit essays serve the same learning/review functions of
testing, but without the anxiety of the unknown component of
traditional testing? Essays provide further opportunities for students
to take more responsibility and agency for their own education. I see
the role of teacher as one of a guide, who gives structure, direction
and new perspectives to students allowing them to discover what skills
and talents they possess and then to help them hone these skills and
talents. With such a structure, students must still review, organize,
synthesize and disseminate information and understanding with a
critical eye and in a clear and concise manner. I can then be an
advisor and counselor steering students to the key aspects of unit that
is necessary for them to know at this point in their lives and
educational growth. This makes for a more efficient use of energy and
focus on the important and pertinent.

Other methods are available as well. Oral presentations make use of
similar skills of review, evaluation and organization while also
employing oral communication development. Work sheets can focus
students on attention to detail. Creative assignments, such as
allowing students to write historical fiction or cartoons or music or
collages, as long as they are grounded in the material of the unit
still require students to review, organize and synthesize material. If
it is appropriate, why not give students a degree of responsibility for
teaching themselves and one another by putting them at the front of the
classroom? As long as a teacher is in the classroom to provide
structure and focus and to oversee content, letting students teach one
another can be a valuable tool.

There are some valuable aspects of traditional teaching: memorization,
self-preparation, responding to an unknown. Perhaps the most
legitimate argument for traditional testing is that students will get
tests in university or AP/IB standardized tests. Giving them tests in
the classrooms helps them when other criteria or determinants put them
into as testing situation. If learning is to be the focus of the
classroom and unit material, testing seems like only one of many
methods for students to process significant amounts of material. It
may not be the best method, certainly if students come to the test with
little or no idea of what will be asked of them. If testing is to be
used, why not provide students with prospective questions? This
focuses attention on the more crucial material, but still forces
students to review, organize, synthesize and disseminate information,
but with less tension.

To test or not to test? I am de-emphasizing traditional testing in the
classroom. I want to turn more and more responsibility to students. I
will give parameters and guidance for various assessment methodologies.
Ultimately, my students must still use the requisite skills to
demonstrate their understanding of material. I prefer to let students
do it in a manner that is more comfortable for them as a means to
maximize the effectiveness of student learning and interests. I still
give tests, because students must be exposed to working in situations
where they are not always comfortable. However, I can do so with less
stress on the format or content of the test and more emphasis on the
material that must be prepared for an assessment, be it a test of essay
or presentation.

[Mary Montgomery]

I am glad that Russ offered this topic for discussion, as it is something that has been on my mind a lot too.  Coming from a university setting, where I have not been required to give standardized tests, I am skeptical of them. 

I do understand, as Russ says, the bureaucratic need to measure the progress of students.  While I think there are other methods for measuring the progress of any given student, perhaps standardized testing fits a need for efficiency in assessing large numbers of students.  I am not sure it follows, however, that it is  useful to compare students among peers, or grade levels from year to year, or to compare schools within districts.   I think these comparisons look nice, but are rarely useful.  They do allow administrators to marshall data that can be reviewed - but I think US society is caught up in appreciating the nice, neat packages of numbers and statistics without considering what they really mean.

How often, in these studies, are we comparing apples with apples?  Comparing the scores of various schools across a given district could be useful with all other factors held constant - economic factors, social factors, teaching methods, facilities, etc.   I have never understood the rationale for comparing the scores of students in Grade 4, for example, from year to year.  Cohorts vary dramatically from one year to the next.  Why not study a given cohort of students across a 5-10 year span?  Wouldn't this tell us more about what students are learning and when?  And if students in Grade 4 do well on a test administered in October, should not the credit be given to the students' K-3 teachers that have been teaching them how to learn?  How much credit can be given to these teachers rather than the students themselves; and for that matter, to what extent can teachers be held accountable for students' grades?

>"Testing...is designed to make students take stock of all

pertinent material related to a given unit. It is a review of
accumulated information and to do so with a critical eye. The goal is
for students to put all of the pieces together in a cohesive and
coherent manner in preparation for a question or series of questions,
which they do not know of in advance, designed to examine or assess the breadth and depth of understanding."

I absolutely agree with this, and it seems to me that my students learn more from this process of revision than they do from any exam.  No matter how useful I may think my essay exams and projects are - it is in the preparation that students seem to me to do the most learning.  Here's what I wonder - would they do so well in the revision without the exam looming on the horizon?  Could I get them to revise for the sake of knowledge. Is there another more immediate incentive that could work?

The issue of students being tested on your POV versus creating their own POV is perhaps easier for history teachers than those in many other fields.  I may have to work harder to get my students to believe that they can disagree, that they can collect, organize, and present evidence that may disagree with what I think and still "test well," because they are not used to the idea.  How possible is it for students to disagree with the teacher's answer in maths or biology?  (Perhaps it is more possible than I think it is. Trapti - what do you think?)  In history, though, I can show students that historians debate evidence and "fact" all the time.  What I look for in their essay exams is their ability to use the evidence they have.  How do they organize it?  Is it logical? Have they made a convincing argument?  This requires me to work pretty hard in coming up with good questions - those that do not allow them to regurgitate what they have heard me say in class.  I am not always good at it, but I am always better than a multiple choice or fill-in-the-blank test.

I think that the types of essays and projects that Russ suggests, for my field, do tell more about what students have learned than a standard test format.  I also feel that these methods teach students how to think, and how to learn.  Students do have to take agency in the learning process, and this can stimulate them to take agency in learning outside the classroom.  They come to realize that they can learn in more ways than through reading and taking notes and that learning is not only necessary, but can be a thrilling experience.

>"There are some valuable aspects of traditional teaching: memorization,
self-preparation, responding to an unknown."

I have to admit it - I agree with this too, and the fact that I do really bothers me.  I can't square this aspect of testing with my other ideas.  There are some things - some dates, names, events - that I wish students knew without turning to the internet.  I often hear students say that they should not have to memorize anything - all they really need to learn is how to be a master at finding information. That worries me.  By not requiring my students to memorize facts and dates am I helping to atrophy a part of their brains?  Am I helping to create a society where no one *knows* anything...but they know how to find it out? (Yes - perhaps a more existential question than I should ask.)  Is it ok for my students not to know that Ghana is in West Africa, as long as they know the address www.mapquest.com?

 >"I still give tests, because students must be exposed to working in situations
where they are not always comfortable. However, I can do so with less
stress on the format or content of the test and more emphasis on the
material that must be prepared for an assessment, be it a test of essay
or presentation."

I like this idea, Russ, and it may be a way of thinking that I need to adopt if I am to be a successful high school teacher.  I don't normally give timed exams, and if I do, have always given the questions in advance.  My focus has been on the students' ability to construct arguments - something I felt they could not be expected to do well with "surprise" questions.  I also have never used presentations for assessment, and if you are willing, I'd really like to hear a few examples of presentation topics and formats that you use in class.  I have given a fair number of oral exams, as I believe that some students write well, while others excel in speaking.  That may be too time consuming for a high school classroom and could also perhaps be seen as too subjective for assessment.

Thank you for suggesting this topic and for putting your ideas out there as a springboard.  I am keen to read what others think.

Best.
Mary

---

Sponsored Link

Mortgage rates as low as 4.625% - $150,000 loan for $579 a month. Intro-*Terms