Dear Parents: What happens in the testing room?

[proud2BlibKansan]

Dear Parents,

I’m going to walk you through what happens in a testing room to help demystify your child’s test taking experience.

First off, I’m told to take down anything from my walls that might help kids out. That means they are now emerged in a neutral testing environment. No Word Walls, no prompts, no student work. The room is either stripped to the bare walls or paper is stapled up over everything. This is so every school and every class has the same disadvantages. It’s also very depressing.

OK, so the day of the test, I walk down to the farthest place on the other side of the world and pick up a box that has all my testing materials in it, signing away my firstborn should I lose a pencil. I walk into my classroom, and at the bell there soon appears my testing group that consists of 36 students I’ve never seen before. Students, you see, are not necessarily assigned to classrooms they’ve ever been in. I don’t know them, and they don’t me. Kinda uncomfortable all around.

I notice there’s a girl crying. Her friend leans over and whispers that her boyfriend just broke up with her. I thank the friend for the gossip and ask the unfortunate casualty of tween-dom if she needs a tissue. She sniffs and shakes her head in the negative, suggesting she’s trying to be strong for the test for which she’s about to receive. I have no doubt this test is very high on her priority list right now.

more . . . http://tweenteacher.com/2009/07/24/what-happens-in-the-testing-room/

[madfloridian]

1. Oh I so remember days like that.

The most depressing thing in the world to see a classroom like that. Not good for the kids either.

Moving post.

Recommended.

[aikoaiko]

2. It really doesn't sound that bad.

:shrug:

There is always noise in the data, but that true for all schools.

[proud2BlibKansan]

5. It's incredibly stressful for kids

Yes. It is bad. Not at all in the best interests of the kids.

[aikoaiko]

9. It sounds like the standardized testing of my youth in thelate 1970s and 1980s

And I didn't find it particularly stressful. I was told to do the best I could, I did, and that was that.

I don't find testing to be the problem. I find the problem to be how those test scores are used.

[proud2BlibKansan]

10. I have taught that long and it is very different today

We start teaching kids how to pass the test day one. It's a constant focus all year long. Then there are pre tests and predictor tests. In my district, we spend more weeks testing than we do teaching.

Then the test itself is very different. As the OP says, we have to remove every chart, poster, etc from the walls. We have to isolate the kids. Some states mandate that teachers can't test their own kids. In my state, inspectors from the state dept of ed come in and check the room while the kids are testing. It's very intimidating.

[aikoaiko]

16. Ok, but the testing room and procedures sound just like the ones when I was a student.

I remember testing rooms that were sterile, timers, proctors, do-not-go-past-this-page instructions, put your pencils down now commands, etc. Maybe NJ was a little ahead of the game.

I get it that there is more testing going on now and that there is insane pressure on teachers and admins to meet standards, but the testing room stuff really doesn't sound that different.

[proud2BlibKansan]

18. In elementary school?

High school - yes. But testing wasn't like this in elem school that long ago. Not where I taught.

[aikoaiko]

23. I honestly don't remember what room we used in elementary school, we may have used the cafeteria

Again, it wasn't overly stressful or intimidating, but then again the pressure on teachers and admins wasn't as great either.

[Iggo]

28. Back in the late 60's and early 70's....

...we took our "bubble tests" in the cafeteria.

(Table 7! Pencils down!)

EDIT: And it was as much of the whole damn school as could fit in there at one time. Hundreds of kids.

[Ms. Toad]

24. It really isn't the room and the test day procedures

it is the weight placed on the scores from these tests - and what that does to the teachers and students in the lead up to the tests.

I never even knew when my daughter had a regular test coming up - and most of the time she didn't bother to mention at the end of the day that she had one. Tests were non-events.

Until 4th grade.

She was either the first or second class to hit one of the milestones in the NCLB nonsense. I heard about that test months in advance from her - and not in a good way. The preparation process freaked her out enough that she failed the writing portion of the test. She was so terrified of the consequences of working on a section she wasn't permitted to work on, that she when she (mistakenly) thought she had reached the end of the writing section she was afraid to turn the page to see if there was more writing. She handed it in early. The teacher didn't bother to check (or wasn't permitted to check) so no one who felt free to look beyond the page she completed said to her when she finished the test way before anyone else - "Did you mean to skip the last 2/3 of the test?"

My daughter graduated last spring as valedictorian of her class. When we got the results back of that 4th grade test back, she was only one point away from passing - even having done only one of the three writing sections. If the testing process does that to the caliber student my daughter obviously was, just imagine what it is doing to everyone else.

[Lance_Boyle]

31. that's my memory, too, from the 70s and 80s in NC

And yes, teacher, even in elementary school. We took the CAT (California Achievement Test) every year in elementary school. Proctored just like it's described in the article. What's the beef? :shrug:

[gkhouston]

14. In the 70s, I don't remember preparing for the tests, ever. We simply took them. n/t

[aikoaiko]

15. Me too.

I don't remember preparing for the tests, but in effect we were.

We stuck to the basics doing drills and rote memorization and some creative activities thrown in here and there.

[Igel]

21. We were prepped for some test, in Baltimore in '75 or '76.

It was a silly test, but the pretest showed that a lot of kids would do badly. It was the dawn of the 'functional literacy' business. Not a bad idea, but implemented sadly.

What did it test, in 10th or 11th grade? Map reading. Reading cough syrup instructions. Interpreting written instructions and directions. Useful stuff.

The scary bit was the percentage of kids who'd overdose their kids, if they had any at age 16, on cough syrup, who would get lost if they actually had to read a map to find their way home from school, who couldn't understand simple instructions on how to assemble something. A few weeks' work cleared up the problem nicely enough, however, so my school reached it's obligatory 71% (or thereabouts) with a standard deviation of something like 1.5 points. Carpe median.

[Mariana]

20. It's not like that anymore.

My older kid's middle school had drills every week to "prepare" for the test. They did stuff like practice filling in bubbles. They heard all year long about how important this test was and were told that if they didn't do well they'd be letting down their teachers and classmates.

My younger kid's school, in a different district, held an assembly the Friday before the test to "encourage" the kids to do well. The "encouragement" included the threat that if they failed the test they'd have to go to summer school and/or repeat the grade. My 9 yo daughter came home in tears, terrified that she would fail. She'd worked so hard and earned terrific grades that year. Would that all be for nothing? Would she have to do it all over again? Fortunately, I had the weekend to calm her down. If the test had been next day she might well have frozen up and blown it.

[Igel]

22. I was just taught how important it was to teach testing strategies.

Apparently, the story goes, some kids are just good at taking tests and work out their own. Others aren't. ELLs are especially prone to missing out on some childhood lessons, just as multiple choice tests or filling in bubbles, because things were different in their home countries.

Sometimes it makes sense. Sometimes it doesn't, but curricula, we're told, have to be standardized or they can be biased and preferential.

Barf.

[greenbriar]

3. SO spot on its not funny

WOW

[seabeyond]

4. I thank the friend for the gossip

that is so funny.....

[BlooInBloo]

6. wtf is a "testing room"?

:rofl:

[Riley18]

7. Today we retested the 8 year old kids who did not pass the their state test in March.

I have to tell you that it is really sad to have to put little kids through all this stress for a test. The worst part is that if they did not pass the test today there is little chance of moving on to the 4th grade. It really doesn't matter how they did in school all last year because all that matters is some test their teachers have never even seen. Truth is that some kids that age are really not good test takers.

[proud2BlibKansan]

11. We have to do that too.

It's so sad. My heart aches for those kids.

[Robb]

26. Stupid question:

...If all kids that age aren't good at taking tests, wouldn't the curve be low? :shrug:

[MichiganVote]

8. You forgot the part about educators, the principal and any other tester having to sign a

legal document attesting among other things that they have not removed so much as the test manual from school, discussed the tests with fellow educators and of course, not revealed any part of the test to other students. Or face legal penalties.......:eyes:

[hvn_nbr_2]

12. Too bad that security for ballots isn't as strong as for 6th grade test pencils. nt

[proud2BlibKansan]

19. LOL I say that every year when we test

[AwakeAtLast]

13. Wow. It's like I'm sitting in my 7th Grade class all over again...

I came back to school after being out around 22 days with double pneumonia, complete with a trip to the hospital. What day did I return on?

You guessed it!

[Fumesucker]

17. I'd love to put the legislators who dreamed this crap up in exactly the same situation..

A make-or-break test that will basically determine their future, treat them just like they want the kids treated.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

25. I always enjoyed the standardized tests

It usually meant no HW for a week.
No new lessons.
Nothig affected your report card.

[Bill McBlueState]

27. How often do kids do this in each grade level?

I agree with the posters upthread; this does mirror my testing experience in the 1980's.

But as I recall, we had maybe one week of standardized testing every two years. And not very much was riding on those tests. They were just one of several ways to identify kids who were above or below average academically and thus had different needs.

I think the difference today is not in the specific way the tests are conducted, but rather in their frequency and importance.

[LWolf]

30. Every grade, every year.

How many times a year depends on your state and district. In CA, we did this once a year, but it took 3 weeks, 3-4 hours a day.

We also, though, had district level trimester "formative" assessments that took about 2 weeks of instructional time every trimester. I put "formative" in quotes because these assessments were not used to inform instruction, which is the purpose of formative assessment. They were used to hold teachers accountable for sticking to the district pacing schedule for the mandated scripted curriculum.

I left CA 4 years ago. In my current state and district, we test 3 times a year, plus use a variety of other assessments, some formative, some not. We keep a portfolio of work samples scored according to state rubrics. The portfolio of samples follows the student through until 12th grade.

While I think 3 times is too much, especially for those who are able to meet the required benchmark the first time, we still don't test as long as CA. 30 minutes a day for 3-5 days, depending on the student. All in the lab, on computers, so we don't have to take the room down and put it back up every time we test.

My middle school students, last year, did really well on the first round of testing. It pissed them off that they had to keep testing; many of them bombed the 2nd and 3rd rounds on purpose, choosing answers randomly without reading any of the test items. When results came in, they told me quite cheerfully that they'd decided not to waste their time, since they'd already passed the benchmark for their grade level once that year.

Of course, that shows negative growth for the year, and that's what I'll be judged on. It doesn't matter what they learned.

[LWolf]

29. I gave those tests

When I taught in CA. It took 3 weeks, 3-4 hours a day, to get through one round of required state testing.

Out of all the grades I taught and tested, I remember the 2nd grade math portion most clearly. That's where I read the problems, ALL STORY PROBLEMS, to the students. They weren't written in the test booklet so that poor reading wouldn't be a factor. I was allowed to read the problem one time; they were allowed 10 seconds to answer. Poor reading wasn't a factor, but auditory skills and time certainly were.

And now we have the brilliance of Duncan, from the failed Chicago reform system, deciding to use all those scores to determine how I'm paid.

Fuck Duncan and the horse he rode in on. To be blunt.

Some more from the article:

We’ve been sitting there for 3 hours of testing. The kids are fried. I’m fried. The bell rings and the kids make a break for it. I wave to them knowing that we’ll be doing this all over again the next day. I pack up the supplies: count each pencil, eraser, scratch paper, alphabetize the answer sheets and booklets, and schlep them back down to the room on the other side of the world.

And now here’s the LA Times with a report that California is having funding threatened if it can’t use test scores for their teacher evaluations.

Here are the facts:

1. A certain percentage of questions from standardized tests are meant to be too challenging (meaning, there’s only a small sliver of student pie who are meant to be able to answer those questions).

2. Questions that too many students get right are dumped from the test as being too easy. In other words, if every teacher did their job well, and teach the standards such that the kids can all answer a particular question, that question is deemed not challenging enough. So if too many teachers do their job well according to test scores, the test must be the problem, not the teachers who are the solution.

3. Taking funding away from failing schools will not lead to anything but more failing schools.