The implications of high stakes assessments on teachers and students are both immense and intense. The data received from these types of tests help institutions and their administration make important decisions about students, schools, and districts for the purpose of accountability in ensuring that students are enrolled in effective schools and being taught by effective teachers.
According to TeachNOW, an international educator preparation program headquartered in Washington, DC, “most schools measure student learning on an annual basis. Many schools in the US have adopted assessments that are created for the Common Core and Advanced Placement (AP). International schools often use AP, the Cambridge system, and/or assessments created for International Baccalaureate (IB) curricula (among others). The results of these tests are often used to determine whether students should be promoted to the next grade and/or graduate from high school. Assessments are also used to place students in levels of RTI when they need extra support.”
Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study, or TIMSS, is used for international achievement comparisons and is linked to teacher evaluation for effectiveness.
It is important to note, however, that there is conflicting evidence regarding the impact of student and teacher creativity and motivation as a result of these assessments.
The implications of high stakes assessments in my current school:
My current employer is a K-12 charter school with a heavy focus on STEM college preparatory curriculum. As such, we are bound by the AzMerit, a state standardized test, which in a few years will have a minimum passing rate to graduate from high school. In preparation for the student’s success, the school uses i-Ready for growth assessments and diagnostics. This is to provide teachers with 2 sets of data: (1) determine readiness to sit for the state exam to receive a passing score each year, and (2) help identify students for intervention as the diagnostics predict their grade level in math and language arts. In comparison with the local public school districts, at this time they do not use a sophisticated, data-driven approach to predict success. Instead, they seek out class grades, which are neither calibrated (based upon teacher technique) nor standardized (some grades do not have a curriculum guide that is enforced). One class period per week is devoted to i-Ready, and Bellwork is created based upon the general class trends.
The charter district maps the AzMerit blueprint to the common core (ACCRS) with all efforts focused on preparing students to achieve high marks on the AZ test. As a result of the student’s achieved scores, teacher base salary is increased or decreased based upon the testing outcomes.
The implications of high stakes assessments in the international & domestic spotlight:
According to the National Center for Education Statistics, “At grade 8, the U.S. average mathematics score (518) in 2015 was higher than the TIMSS scale centerpoint of 500 [with] eight education systems ha[ving] higher average mathematics scores than the United States: Canada, Chinese Taipei, Hong Kong (China), Japan, Quebec (Canada), the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation, and Singapore.” This creates extra pressure for schools in the United States to improve their scores to remain in competition with leading countries in mathematics for future jobs and innovation.
Comparing the STEM charter with its local public counterpart, I interviewed Mrs. Smith*, a K-12 educator within the Chandler unified school district. As students emerge from 6th grade, the pressure to test at a higher level in middle school and beyond becomes more intense. The main problem is attaining motivation of the student to do well on the AzMerit, as there is no incentive for the student. At present time, students are not yet required to pass the test to move to the next grade or graduate, and instead are placed into intervention or special education (with a qualifying diagnosis). The only real motivation to test “satisfactorily” is to not qualify for RTI services.
*Name changed to keep anonymous at interviewee’s request.
Conclusion
Students are reacting to the increasing pressures to perform by only wanting to learn about material that is exactly aligned to the AzMerit. As educators, we understand that we are unintentionally creating a generation that is “learning to perform” rather than “learning to grow”. This will create added pressure on corporations to produce concise, impactful, and engaging training as this generation ages and enters the workforce, and fill in the gaps with critical thinking skills.
References
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (n.d.). Fast facts. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=1
Smith, J. (2018, Jan 23). In-person interview. Chandler High School.
Valerie Scheidt 