December 27, 2010
Improving the Way Students Are Assessed
To the Editor:
Re “New No.2 at City Schools Sees More and Better Tests as Answer” (front page, Dec. 14):
Shael Polakow-Suransky’s views on improving student assessment tests to include problem solving, analytical thinking and writing skills are admirable ideas. But the test should not be the focus on improving our educational system. It is what happens after the “perfect” test is scored.
Will this test be used ...
(a) to learn how to make a better test;
(b) to put a school on notice of failure; or
(c) as a teaching tool to improve an individual student’s performance and learn from this tool?
Carole Gagliano
Bellport, N.Y., Dec. 14, 2010
The writer has been an elementary school teacher, elementary librarian and high school library media specialist.
•
To the Editor:
More tests?
Not such a great idea, although I suppose that filling the school year with test after test would at least have the positive effect of cutting into the ridiculous amount of time teachers are expected to spend on test preparation.
Better tests?
Now there’s an idea worth pursuing. Imagine testing students on the knowledge and skills they are actually expected to learn, where they read, analyze, write about and discuss good fiction and nonfiction, and use their skills in math to tackle real-life problems.
Not sure that calculating the diameter of a straw is the best idea Shael Polakow-Suransky could have come up with, but I would like to hear more discussion about how to bring an end to the absurdity of relying on standardized short-answer and multiple-choice tests for assessing student learning.
Howard Miller
Dobbs Ferry, N.Y., Dec. 14, 2010
The writer is chairman of the department of secondary education at Mercy College School of Education.
•
To the Editor:
Assessing critical thinking is important. Keep in mind, though, that revised tests do not increase student achievement. Test scores of New York City students have hardly risen since Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg took control. After test revisions first raised scores then lowered them, we learned that the test results told us about the lack of validity of the tests rather than the achievement of the students.
Money spent revising tests is money diverted from improving student achievement.
Charles Merrill
New York, Dec. 14, 2010
The writer was a teacher and psychologist for the New York City public schools for 35 years.
•
To the Editor:
Yes, Shael Polakow-Suransky is right. One can design tests that are worth teaching to, but they are more expensive and harder to grade.
When money is tight, cheaper tests will be multiple choice, teachers will teach test-taking skills, the curriculum will narrow to what is tested, and the risks of cheating will rise. Test-based reform has turned out the way critics anticipated, not the way the reformers intended.
Francis Schrag
Madison, Wis., Dec. 15, 2010
The writer is professor emeritus of educational policy studies, University of Wisconsin at Madison.
