Let’s be clear that assessments are not the standards and vice versa. When I was changing careers years ago and had to do a teaching internship, I had this great idea of gathering stories from educators about the trials and trivia of high-stakes tests and publishing a book. Some of their experiences were so fascinating and foreign to me. I’ve since gained plenty familiarity and that book still needs to be written, but those stories need to be followed with reason.
Here are Michigan facts, reasoning, and sources about high-stakes testing:
- The Fall MEAP test is being replaced by the M-Step test in Spring 2015
The M-Step test requires 7-11 hours of computer seat time per student
- This does not include technology hardware management and instructional preparation time for schools and students http://tinyurl.com/n4xm64b
- M-Step is created and delivered by the makers of Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC), which is projected to replace the M-Step in 2016
- MEAP cut scores (or levels indicating proficiency) were increased in 2011 in advance of these tests to prepare for perceived dips that new test formats expect http://tinyurl.com/ko2kdad
- Determining cut scores in either direction is “a matter of values, not an empirical truth…reasonable people will disagree.” http://tinyurl.com/mo8x8cs
- SBAC field tests project that more than 50% of students will be not reach “proficiency” on these tests
- These projections have been confirmed by hundreds of educators based on the rigor of the tests (the PR task is to help others understand why) http://tinyurl.com/k6uu2w2
- New tests represent a different type of rigor that will definitely effect classroom teaching (e.g. performance tasks vs multiple choice)
- Over time results should better indicate higher understanding and ability
- Students report: 10th grader – “it’s hard because if you didn’t know the answer you couldn’t guess”; 6th grader – “first test I’ve taken where I actually learned something while taking it.”http://tinyurl.com/mxw4rhw
- Michigan schools are required by the ESEA Act of 2001 (No Child Left Behind) to test 95% of enrolled students
- “Opting out” of high-stakes tests is a movement parents and educators are exploring across the nation http://www.fairtest.org/
- Michigan Department of Education’s response to parent “opt out” and federal law is neutral and left to local districts http://tinyurl.com/nhdogbe
- High-stakes testing has multiple purposes: evaluating curriculum, assessing student achievement, evaluating teacher performance, financing local schools, ensuring equitable education
- Quality assessment is part of the teaching/learning cycle and student achievement data is important to inform instruction
Obviously, the news isn’t all bad but is worth talking about. Please find non-educators and parents to join the #MIpubED Twitter chat this Tuesday, March 17 at 8:30pm to talk about high-stakes tests and our kids.
Questions for the chat will be:
- How is assessment part of the teaching/learning cycle?
- How are you feeling about the MStep/SBAC test starting next month?
- What do you think about the 50% proficiency expectations for MStep?
- How can these tests be used to improve instruction?
- What are some benefits of high-stakes tests?
- What are benefits of assessments that accurately represent learning?
- What are negative consequences of high-stakes tests? #
- How do you think the opt-out movement will effect public education?
- What are some alternatives for ensuring equity and improving all schools?
- What is your largest area of interest/concern regarding what’s going on in public education?