Critics: Tests dumb down math

[salin]

Critics: Tests dumb down math
Too much emphasis on basic skills, top educators say

By Tracy Dell'Angela
Tribune staff reporter
Published January 4, 2004

As the state completes plans to expand its standardized testing program, prominent math educators are criticizing the proposed design, arguing that it will dumb down math instruction by focusing disproportionately on basic skills at the expense of analytical thinking.

"The message they will send out to teachers is ..., `Pay attention to this because this is what you're going to be tested on,'" said Philip Wagreich, director of the Institute for Mathematics and Science Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago. "It's not uniformly horrible, but the main thrust is back-to-basics--multiple-choice questions emphasizing routine tasks, rote memorization and computational skills."

The fact that the phrasing of test questions could stir such an uproar underscores the growing cynicism among teachers who fear that the relentless push for better test scores and standardized curriculum is harming classroom instruction.

(snip)

The State Board of Education is expected to decide this month which of three major testing companies will win the bid to handle the assessment program, which will cost $18 million a year.

As part of the process, state officials are asking that the revised tests measure not only how well students meet the state's learning standards, but also how well they measure up against national norms. That would allow individual school districts to use these results instead of administering national tests.

Depending on which company the state selects, the new test would be an adaptation of the Iowa Test of Basic Skills, the Stanford Achievement Tests or the TerraNova tests.

more (requires registration): http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0401040332jan04,1,4350375.story?coll=chi-news-hed

Comment from salin: to my knowledge only one of the fore mentioned test is provided by a nonprofit entity. Normally I wouldn't necessarily take such note - but have reviewed various tests and found the nonprofit Iowa test to be better (as it allows teachers to use the tests as "diagnostics" which can at least be a tool for teachers in addressing students' needs.)

However the increased pressure based on NCLB to use commercial tests - leads me to greater levels of skepticism of a) how much this costs and b) is this perceived to be a 'windfall' for selected test/textbook companies (many of the commercial tests have been bought and are now properties of specific text book companies - again in and of itself not necessarily a bad thing, but in todays' context perhaps gives even more of a windfall because in theory who will have the "best" text books (from a marketing standpoint) to help schools teach to the text than the company that "creates" the test.

This is of course a joke, as the books are written by separate entities than the test makers - all pretty much independent of the company - but it is powerful marketing to those districts/schools (even states - ala text book adoptions) which are working from 'fear' of meeting the Annual Yearly Progress bars set by NCLB. Seems like it could work as a nice little racket.

[mhr]

1. In Texas, The Standardized Test Was Dumbed Down Last Year

All in the name of improving scores.

One guesses the goal is to make everyone as stupid as ****.

Alternatively, one guesses, **** can't be challenged by anyone as dumb as himself.

[ConcernedCanuk]

2. what is scary - IMAGINE kids taking the tests we took in the 60's ???

.
.
. I could safely say that most grade 10's couldn't do grade 6 math

Well heck, even High School Grads would have a hard time

And well, as for reading and writing ?

Phew !!

we are raising illiterates, not just the USA, Canada too

[Thor_MN]

3. They have been deploring declining test scores for generations

I recall stories of how our scores were lower than previous scores (high school 1981). One thing that never seems to be accounted for is that it has become less accepatible to allow kids to "drop out" of school over the years. Don't get me wrong, this is a good thing, but how do you normalize the scores of the most recent years against earlier years where is was accepted, even expected that students who were not doing well would quit school? The earlier years have the "benefit" of removing the worst scores therefore increasing their average. As the years pass and efforts to keep everyone in school and "main stream" students who had not been allowed in public schools increase, what is going to happen to test scores? I don't know that you can make valid comparisons across the years.

[teach1st]

4. What grade do I teach?

This picture below shows my morning math warm up for October 30 - yup, my handwriting is the pits. I teach mostly low income students and they can do the math.

Parents typically get frustrated trying to help their kids with the math, because, according to them, they never had this when they went to school. What proof do you have for saying schools are producing illiterates?

Actually, some data shows the schools holding their own (scores are even rising) since the 70s in both reading and math in most populations. That might even be surprising given the increased and more severe social and economic difficulties we're seeing among our students.

My beef with some of the standardized math tests my kids take is that there is very little computation tested.



(Edited to add an "is")

[ming]

10. Middle school?

Looks like 7th or 8th grade stuff on the board to me. Beginning algebra and geometry along with review of some 6th grade level stuff. Could even be material for an advanced 6th grade class (based on the standards in NY).

Here in upstate NY, I'd say that 70% of 8th graders would have difficulty with these problems -- and you're making them easy!

[teach1st]

12. That's fifth grade

And it has to be done mentally.

[ming]

15. Good for you! n/t

[treepig]

8. yeah, and IMAGINE the kids walking to school in the snow

barefoot and uphill in both directions, like we did in the 50's!

and they call those the "good ole days" :freak:

[The Zanti Regent]

13. Remember the Iowa Basic Skills Tests?

Now those were awfully difficult standardized tests in the 60s and 70s!

[alcuno]

5. In Florida, some Bush family member is involved in a company

that is selling "test prep" material for the FCAT; for some reason I think it's that cockroach, Neil. NCLB is a national travesty and I'll vote for anyone willing to kill it.

I'm a math teacher in Illinois. Until "reform" math, I at least had students in my classes who could perform basic calculations, now I don't even have that.

As for NCLB, we had students students with serious learning disabilities who are expected to be performing at grade level. Many students are diagnosed LD BECAUSE of the gap between their ability and their performance. It's totally nuts. We also have a student with Down's Syndrome, unable to function without a full-time aide, who is lumped into the pool with all the other kids. The parents of many of these special needs students are as outraged as the teachers.

[teach1st]

7. It's Neil

The company is "Ignite":
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3334.htm



This is from a "disgruntled teacher" web site I run (tuff-teach.com)

http://www.tuff-teach.com/pcs/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2145&highlight=Neil+Bush



Here's some more Bush hijinks, but it's posted in our "private" area - district teachers only. The link to the article is broken, but here's some of the post.

By Emily J. Minor, Palm Beach Post Staff Writer
Thursday, February 20, 2003

With more state tests around the corner, and with the parents of some third-graders panicking about their kids' performance portfolios, I was thrilled this week to find out about a little something called www.fcatexplorer.com.

(snip)

The Bush administration gave a multimillion-dollar job to a campaign supporter without putting the contract out to bid. The Web site is helping our kids study for a test that many teachers, parents and administrators believe is reducing classroom instruction to formula teaching -- "teaching to the test." That said, one-fourth of our third-graders still can't read.

[Gingersnap]

11. Bingo! you hit the nail on the head

I'd like to think that in the past the drive for standardized tests was at least partially motivated by one side in a pedogogical debate, but this Neil, testing and NCLB connection shows that this is just like everything else Bush* has done--screwing us to help out his rich friends and family.

[cthrumatrix]

6. no child left behind (to think) .... so many people to thank..where to

start

[kath]

9. "the assessment program, which will cost $18 million a year"

What a #^@&*!& waste of money -- these stupid tests make the schools worse, and suck tons of money out of the system.

[RobinA]

14. DAMN!!!

Why couldn't I be in school now, instead of 30 years ago? I was terrible at math in the olden days. Still am, actually.