High Stakes

School Leaders Weigh in on Testing, Reform, and the Goal of Educating Every American Child "American schools in the twentieth century resemble the battleships of World War II. Large, powerful, cumbersome, with enormous crews...Maneuverability is not their strength. When ordered to change course, they do so, but there are significant delays. The bigger the change in the direction, the longer it takes for the ship to achieve the new course." —Warren Professor Patricia Albjerg Graham [caption id="attachment_9123" align="alignleft" width="185" caption="illustration: Edel Rodriguez ©2002"] [/caption] The common sense of our present day—that the majority of students in American public schools ought to achieve at reasonably high levels—is unprecedented. Until recently, public schools never aimed to create high scholastic achievement for the masses. In fact, 100 years ago, not along after our nation made the transition from an agricultural to an industrial society, less than 10 percent of the population even attended high school. Back then, the central mission of education was to train workers and to assimilate new immigrants to the values and codes of American culture. Schools aimed to turn out young people with enough skills to become productive, self-sustaining members of our rugged and increasingly urban society. And that's exactly what they did. As industry seeded the American landscape with rows of metallic factories—followed by railroad tracks and then high-speed roads—the education of workers had to match progress. And again it did. By 1940, technical and vocational schools were well established, and high-school graduation rates rose to 50 percent. The "Rising Tide of Mediocrity" Not until the early 1980s did widespread academic achievement become a concern of national policy. That's when Japanese cars and German machine tools saturated the international marketplace—a threat to America's dominance. How had it come to pass that we were falling behind in areas of commerce, industry, science, and technological innovation? "A Nation at Risk," the grimly titled report issued in 1983 by the U.S. Department of Education, answered this question by describing the "rising tide of mediocrity" in young Americans' education. The report went so far as to say that American public schools "have, in effect, been committing an act of unthinking, unilateral educational disarmament." Politicians and business leaders gathered behind these powerful words to insist, for the first time, on high standards for all children—a goal schools had never before embraced, and one they did not immediately know how to achieve. The New Navigational Tool: Testing What emerged was the standards-based reform movement that dominates American education today. The idea is that if school leaders institute explicit educational expectations for young people, they can periodically measure student progress, diagnose where shortcomings lie, and prescribe appropriate practices. The measure for this reform is testing—tests designed by the states, keyed to standards of what children ought to know. Twenty years into this charge for widespread educational advancement, standards and testing affect the lives of nearly all publicly educated children in America. But the questions remain formidable: Is statewide testing benefiting or beleaguring learning and teaching? What kind of professional development is needed to train teachers for new goals? What ought to be the cost of failure? And exactly who should pay the price? For answers, we turned to the professionals—both inside and outside the schoolhouse—who bear the weight of education's much more comprehensive history. The diversity of their responses reveals the complexity of charting a course that will steer the ship of education toward progress. David W. Gordon (Web Exclusive) There is a growing movement in our country that testing is useless or even harmful. Boycotts of testing have sprung up in many upper middle class enclaves. I understand the frustration of those parents about overtesting, but we are one nation—and we have many young people who are only stepping up to the door of opportunity. Our poor and minority students will have to learn to do well on tests to help open those doors. We can reform our testing system in the long term, but for now we owe it to all children to help them meet the standards that will allow them to compete on the same terms as more advantaged students. David W. Gordon, Ed.M.'71, C.A.S.'72, is superintendent of schools in the Elk Grove Unified School District in Elk Grove, California. Saul M. Yanofsky (Web Exclusive) A range of initiatives from the New York State Education Department (SED) regarding standards, assessments, and graduation requirements has been very helpful in [forming] such important district strategies as aligning our curriculum, more effectively focusing our staff development, and instituting additional summer and afterschool programs. Positive results are reflected in gradual but steady increases in student performance on various state exams. SED initiatives should be designed to achieve state policy objectives while minimizing the negative effects on schools and students. This requires an open, candid, and continuous process of collaboration between state policy makers and thoughtful people working in schools. In my opinion, this has not happened in New York State. Decision-makers have generally been unresponsive to feedback from concerned school people. In fact, buttressed by the support of the business community and many local and regional newspapers (who are even more distant from the realities of schooling than state policymakers), SED officials have tended to characterize those who question their initiatives as "whiners and complainers." And so many of us find ourselves on the "wrong side" of a set of initiatives that had so much potential for good. If a similar dynamic exists in other states, this does not bode well for the long-term success of the standards movement across the country. Saul M. Yanofsky, M.A.T.'63, Ed.D.'68, is superintendent of schools in the White Plains Public Schools in White Plains, New York. Edward Doherty (Web Exclusive) Last year, the Boston Teachers Union surveyed over 400 of its members on a variety of issues, including MCAS (Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System) testing. The overwhelming majority of teachers (68%) indicated support for this testing program when it is used as a diagnostic instrument, and even as a accountability tool when similar schools and/or school districts are being compared. However, by an even wider margin (85%), teachers are opposed to the use of this test as a high-school graduation requirement. Although there is some indication that the implementation of MCAS testing has improved curriculum and helped push students and teachers to focus more aggressively on academic achievement, the potential consequences of depriving thousands of students a high-school diploma is simply unacceptable to most teachers. Although Massachusetts has consistently been among the leading states on a variety of national student assessment tests, nearly half of our 10th graders failed either or both the math and language-arts test last spring. In many inner city schools, this failure rate soared to 80% or 90%. Despite promises of more remediation programs for students and the opportunity for them to retake the exams up to four times, teachers fear for their students' future are not assuaged. Even if those failure rates are dramatically reduced in the next two years, far too many students will be deprived of a high-school diploma and the opportunities that go along with being a high-school graduate. And, clearly, these consequences will fall disproportionately on Black and Latino students. Finally, teachers object strongly to the massive amount of reporting and editorializing abot MCAS results and believe that the unfair comparisons drawn between urban districts and affluent suburban communities are destructive to the educational climate and demoralizing to vast numbers of teachers, students, and parents. Edward Doherty, Ed.D.'98, is president of the Boston Teachers Union. Thomas Payzant The MCAS (Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System) is a rigorous instrument requiring that every student achieve a basic level of performance in order to graduate. The test, including open-ended as well as multiple-choice questions, is a good one, and the expectations it establishes in English language arts and in mathematics are fair and comprehensive. Educators throughout the state have been engaged in its development. MCAS has required that teachers improve the coordination of instruction, grade by grade and subject by subject, so that material is well covered, in sufficient depth. The test has pushed Boston to redouble its efforts to provide remediation for every student who needs extra help. It has served as a means for teachers to work in teams, examining student work and comparing it to standards—so that everyone is working together to improve instruction. In Boston, MCAS is an important part of a seamless standards-based reform effort that includes clear expectations for what students should learn, curriculum aligned with the standards, high-quality instruction and professional development to help teachers improve their practice, and assessments that provide students with a way to demonstrate what they have learned and how they can apply it. The graduation requirements of MCAS have helped to galvanize support throughout Boston for our schools. Business, higher education, cultural, and nonprofit groups are rallying to help teachers and students improve the quality of our educational experience. While the graduation requirement remains controversial, there is no denying that the test has helped to create a climate of urgency in support of instructional improvement. It has focused public attention on the performance of all students, not just the top performers—and that has dividends for everyone. Thomas Payzant, M.A.T.'63, C.A.S.'66, Ed.D.'68, is superintendent of the Boston Public Schools. Stela Balderas Holcombe Truth be told, I spend much more time responding to my state's accountability system than I do pondering its merits. Currently, the student-level high-stakes test, the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS), is administered in the 10th grade and includes 8th-grade-level math, reading, and writing. My school has been fortunate in that virtually all of our students are able to achieve success on these tests. Do I believe in rigorous standards for student learning and the need to put pressure on schools to improve instruction? Certainly I do, but I question whether high-stakes testing is the only way to create change in schools, and I wonder whether this testing will, in the end, serve the best interests of all students. Last year, I had to tell a student that she didn't pass the "last chance" TAAS exam administered in May of her senior year; I do not even want to imagine the heartbreak that she and her family met. I've only had to do this once, but it was one time too many, and I don't know that I have it in me to do it again. Has TAAS improved or crippled instruction in Texas? This depends on whether the TAAS data are used as a diagnostic tool to guide instruction or whether they become the center of instruction. My personal belief is that more rigorous assessments will eliminate "teaching to the test" as a primary response for those who resorted to this tactic in the past. Certainly there are those within the state who are working hard to eliminate the tests altogether and/or eliminate the high stakes attached for students. However, now that the political machine in Texas has gotten this far in establishing accountability measures, it will be tough for individuals or groups to turn back the hands of time. Only time will tell how the new accountability system is to unfold. Stela Balderas Holcombe, Ed.M.'97, is assistant principal at Taylor High School in Katy, Texas. Douglas Wood In Tennessee, the accountability train officially left the station this school year. Our current ninth-grade class is the first cohort required to pass "Gateway" tests in order to receive a regular high-school diploma. A strong first round of results are in: 76.4% passed the Algebra 1 test; 94.5% passed the Biology 1 test. English II examinations will be administered next year. The tests are not easy. An enormous amount of thought and preparation went into this success rate. Before accountability measured were enforced, the Tennessee legislature ensured that the necessary fiscal resources were there. Since then, teachers across the state have received extensive professional development aimed at Gateway preparation; they were also trained to use value-added data for instructional improvement. And the Gateway tests have been aligned with the state's curriculum. Steps have also been taken to address the instructional needs of students with disabilities and English-language learners. Today, as Tennessee proceeds with Gateway testing, the majority of districts across the state have reduced class sizes to meet mandates established by the legislature. Finally, the state spent a great deal of time field-testing the exams by using commonly accepted statistical methods to establish reliability. To make the tests more fair, we spent several months testing samples of students who reflect the demographics of the state, and then another several months working with teachers to define levels of proficiency. To be sure, Tennessee has made much progress. But we have many challenges ahead, including increasing professional development for middle-school teachers and aligning the curriculum from preschool to college. In short, those states passing high-stakes testing policies must always take into consideration the full range of capacity issues that are necessary for student success. Douglas Wood, Ed.M.'96, Ed.D.'00, is executive director of the Tennessee State Board of Education. Marya Levenson New York has done many things right while implementing "world-class" academic standards. For example, the challenging fourth- and eighth-grade language arts and mathematics tests have had a positive impact on teacher expectations and instruction. Progress is being made toward having all students pass the Regents exams in English, mathematics, and U.S. history, which would be an unprecedented accomplishment for the state and the nation. However, there is too much testing, creating unnecessary stress on children, parents, and teachers, and reducing the amount of instructional time. Eighth graders suffered through five to seven different tests at the end of the 2000-01 school year, which caused a boycott in Scarsdale and an outcry in some other districts. By 2004, high-school graduates will be required to pass five Regents exams; many question whether this goal can be achieved without increasing the dropout rate. The excessive testing has narrowed curricula as many teachers teach to the tests. Moreover, the commissioner's refusal to work with alternative schools to develop valid and reliable performance assessments has given the message that only standardized tests are acceptable to measure student achievement. Testing should be only one part of raising standards. We must attract, educate, and retain the best teachers who are able to teach their increasingly diverse students. Administrators need to institutionalize educational vision, professional development, supervision, and support. And we must provide the resources so that city school districts will develop the instruction and support their students deserve. Marya Levenson, Ed.D.'84, retired as superintendent of North Colonie School District in Newtonville, New York, in June 2001. She is now the director of the Teacher Education Program at Brandeis University. David Youngblood Kentucky had one of the worst public education systems in the country before KERA, the Kentucky Education Reform Act, beset by nepotism, incompetence, and inadequate support. This act has had dramatic positive results, rescuing beleaguered schools, raising test scores, and placing education foremost in the public mind. It is cited nationally as a model program, but at home, reactions are mixed. One controversial component of KERA ties state funding to improved scores on machine-scored and portfolio exams. This requires teachers to spend huge amounts of time preparing their students for the exams. This frustrates them, because they know they could do so much more with their students if they were not hamstrung by portfolios, which can be dominated by teaching to the lowest demoninator. The system falls heaviest on English teachers, who are expected to help students prepare essays for other courses as well. On the other hand, teachers of imagination and resource always seem to find ways to teach well. Several teachers I've met use the portfolio system to do what it does best: help students rework essays until they make them excellent, to figure out on their own how to make their writing better. These teachers engage their students' imagination, have them read and write copiously, and run stimulating, successful classrooms. Fourteen years ago, after 20 years in public education, I was hired by a private school that let me teach what I wanted, how I wanted. I must say that I am glad to be teaching in a school where it is not mandated what I teach or how. I use portfolios whenever I want, I deal with students' strengths and weaknesses individually, I follow my inspiration, and I continue to adore my work. David Youngblood, M.A.T.'65, teaches English at the Sayre School in Lexington, Kentucky. About the Article A version of this article originally appeared in the Spring 2002 issue of Ed., the magazine of the Harvard Graduate School of Education.