Questioning Testing

School Administrator, August, 1996 by Tom Glenn, Monta Akin

Students Monitor Own Progress in One District's Total Quality Application

Why give a test? Studying and implementing a total quality philosophy has forced us to question much of the "common sense" of current practices in education.

Common sense tells us that we give tests to challenge students and find out what they have learned. However, as W. Edwards Deming once said, "The meaning from any statement is what comes from the action that takes place."

Unfortunately, all too often the action that results from our common sense approach to testing is merely rating and ranking of students--sorting them into categories. There is nothing inherently evil about testing or grading. The damage to learners comes from how we use them.

Like most other states, Texas has a mandated testing program, known as the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills. TAAS tests students in grades three through eight and as they exit. Students must pass the exit-level exam to receive a state diploma. Originally TAAS was intended to be a criterion-referenced test to improve instruction. So why did our school district decide it was important to develop yet another assessment?

We found the benefits of TAAS to be limited for several reasons. As the test scores became newspaper headlines and the basis for rating and ranking schools throughout the state, fear escalated. Performance on this one paper-and-pencil test began to drive all instruction, even though businesses were begging for a workforce equipped with sophisticated problem-solving and communication skills.

For many schools, the focus became "How can we raise TAAS scores?" rather than "How can we improve student learning?"

In addition to its inappropriate use for ratings and rankings, TAAS is also after-the-fact testing. Results of the test, which is administered in late spring, usually arrive during the summer long after students are gone. It is used to judge the past, rather than to improve the future. Also, when schools receive information about student performance, it is reported only by broad categories, not by specific skills. This makes it unusable to help guide instruction for individual students.

State testing also has changed dramatically every five years. Even from year to year, the objectives that are tested change. Frustrated by the lack of any consistent, effective process to assess performance of students and/or programs, district staff in Leander developed our own student profile system.

Multiple Objectives

We set out to develop a process for monitoring student progress that would address several key quality principles:

* place the focus on learning (not testing);

* provide data to improve the system;

* prevent poor quality work by building improvement into instructional processes;

* enable students to participate in the management of their own learning process;

* shift a teacher's role from knowledge keeper to knowledge facilitator; and

* celebrate learning, including learning from mistakes.

The profile system consists of comprehensive assessments in language arts and mathematics, which are completed by students at the beginning, middle, and end of the school year. The assessments measure all student competencies for that grade level, so the needs of students at varying stages of achievement can be identified. Abacus Software supports the profiles to provide rapid turnaround in reporting and in-depth analysis.

Administrators and teachers spent two years in grade-level and vertical teams, developing a well-articulated and aligned curriculum for language arts and mathematics. They spent another year developing assessment items and working with software developers to meet our specific expectations. Obviously, it is not a quick-fix solution.

Shift in Thinking

We know that just developing another test is not the answer. If we are going to significantly shift the assessment process to enable students to participate in the management of their own learning, we need to change the roles of students and teachers and, above all, eliminate the fear that results from the judgments placed on test results. How do we do this?

* First, we never report or use profile information to compare teachers or students. Scoring is completed at the campus, and teachers are the first people to receive their profile results. Results come to students in terms of number of competencies mastered--not in the form of a grade.

* Teachers learn to interpret sophisticated reports as they analyze data themselves. In the past, any test analysis was completed for the teachers by central-office staff or principals.

* Students must be trained to use data. Formats are developed to make it easier for young students to analyze and understand.

* Everyone has to be patient while the kinks are worked out of the process and staff and students learn new skills, including working together to improve learning.

Our Benefits

Have we been successful in addressing the key points of our purpose?

The most important benefit of the profile system is that it places information about student performance in the hands of those people who can do something about it, namely students and teachers. Beginning in kindergarten, students are involved in the process.