|
Monday, March 07, 2005
Editorial: High-stakes testing
FAILURE is a good teacher. But in the high-stakes world of standardized exams and education reforms, it no longer is.
A four-decade veteran of public schools, Olive (real name withheld upon request) says that the teachers of old used to stay after school to help slow performers.
These days, with the National Achievement Tests approaching, Olive says they are back to extending their hours in review classes for sixth graders and high school seniors.
It’s not because the mentors are buckling under the withering public perception that public education has slid far below acceptable standards.
Their vigor can be traced to a few lines at the bottom of Regional Memorandum 20, series of 2005, signed by Department of Education (DepEd) 7 Director Carolino Mordeno: “results of the National Achievement Test… (are) one of the factors to be considered for purposes of promotion and performance rating.”
Failure is no longer good, only passing percentiles. But does anyone care to find out if the scores measure learning at all?
Accountability
According to the National Educational Testing and Research Center, standardized tests assess if education is effective and provide information for policies making Filipinos more globally competitive.
The practice is part of education accountability, which the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) defines as: “asking students, educators and institutions to be responsible for education outcomes.”
According to a paper posted on www.ncsl.org, the logical outcome after decades of infusing funds, curriculum offerings, and resources is measuring student achievement.
This accountability can be publicly reported as school scores through a report card system, as well as used as basis for giving rewards and sanctions.
Straitjacketing
However, educational accountability also has its critics.
The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) questions whether the testing tools measure student learning at all. Whether norm-referenced (comparing the student to national standards) or criterion-referenced (measuring student performance according to specific content standards), the tests may not be authentic gauges of analysis, creativity and grasp of social realities. The multiple-choice format, for instance, is inferior to essays that require extended writing responses.
In states where performance tests are linked to high stakes such as promotion to the next level or acquisition of a diploma, the NCSL has documented mass protests filed by students, parents and civil rights advocates.
They cite that the tests are biased against minorities, such as students with disability and proficiency problems in English. As NCSL pointed out, “Unless a primary purpose of a test is to evaluate language proficiency, it should not be used with students who cannot understand the instructions of the language of the test itself.”
High-stake testing that is mandated for school accreditation or curriculum adoption has resulted in the strategy of weeding out underperforming teachers. But as OECD observed, this “risks blaming a victim (when) teachers often need help, not punishment.”
Common sense
This “top-down reform, divorced from the needs and realities of the classroom” violates equity, according to OECD. When teachers are not equipped to deliver the curriculum enabling all students, even those put at risk by social causes, to meet learning standards, the problem is not the accountability of outcomes but the availability of inputs to jumpstart education.
“You cannot expect a ‘formula one’ performance from a regular car,” observed www.oecdobserver.org. “This is not rocket science, just common sense.”
High-stakes testing also creates a regime of rigidity in classrooms where “pass” or “fail” rules not just students but also teachers. “This… encourages (or scares) teachers into spending more class time drilling students to answer questions, with little left to explore the substance of the curriculum and to learn together.”
Will the ability to pass tests replace love of learning and a passion for excellence in catapulting Filipinos into a knowledge-based society? Our future looms dark.
(March 7, 2005 issue)
Write letter to the editor.Click here.
Join the Sun.Star message board.Click here. |
|
[return to top]
[home]
[network page]
|
LOCAL NEWS
BUSINESS
OPINION
SPORTS
LIFESTYLE
FEATURE
SUPERBALITA
WEEKEND
|
