PANEL OF CONTRIBUTORS: A test regimen that is not worth the effort PANEL OF CONTRIBUTORS: A test regimen that is not worth the effort (April 03, 2002)

By Jim MacKenzie

Recently, I found myself confronting a current nemesis, another potential instructional day lost to the quagmire of bureaucratic accountability.

I remember at the start of my career I worried that I would not have enough quality curriculum to fill the 180-day school year. Today that anxiety has morphed into resentment over not having adequate time.

Most teachers spend a career collecting lesson plans, project ideas, audio-visual aids, and textbook assignments to support the teaching of their subject matter. Master teachers have an innate sense of sequencing and timing. It is usually easy to accommodate a one-day interruption or emergency. Now, however, the specter of educational accountability has changed everything.

As a teacher at Menlo-Atherton High School, I am mandated to administer the state exit exam, the STAR test, and the Golden State Exam. These tests may or may not reflect the curriculum the state framework suggests I teach.

The most publicized test _ the SAT 9 (STAR) _ is in no way aligned to the standards that have been established in California. Yet I am expected to teach the material for this test _ in effect, to teach to the test.

Although many would argue for this type of accountability, I have to question the soundness of this position.

When we test freshmen, we explain to them that they shouldn't worry about not being able to answer questions about economics and government, because they won't take those classes until senior year. I normally don't bother to explain that by that time it won't matter anyway, because seniors are not required to take the STAR test.

Mandated testing collectively takes about 14 to 18 days. This has significantly eroded my classroom teaching time. In economics, I teach a chapter a week. Required testing now prevents me from covering three of the chapters.

Ironically, last year one of the essay questions on the Golden State Exam dealt with the Federal Reserve System, a chapter I had chosen not to cover. As my students looked at me with that "Why didn't you prepare us for this?" expression, I had to ask myself what I should omit next year.

My perspective may not reflect that of other teachers at M-A. In an effort to offer greater balance, I asked several veteran teachers and administrators to give me their opinions. Their responses follow.

Greg Whitnah, math: "While I totally support AP exams, Golden State Exams, SAT I's and SAT II's, I am frustrated for all teachers who are asked to prepare for exams that are not aligned with their curriculum. In particular, this includes the STAR (SAT 9) exam and the High School Exit Exam (HSEE). I am even more frustrated by the waste of class time administering so many exams.

"For example, some algebra students are asked to take five exams. These tests encompass nine math instructional periods. One exam could just as effectively measure a student's progress as the five exams that students are currently required to take."

Richard Weaver, social studies: "Every spring, a typical high school student could have to take as many as six multi-hour exams. Is this overkill? Each of these tests claims to measure necessary aptitudes, skills and knowledge.

"While measurement of student progress and mastery is important, I question whether requiring multiple, overlapping, time-consuming tests is the best way to accomplish this goal. In my subject area, the SAT 9 (STAR) exam, a nationally aligned test, does not align with the State of California social studies framework. Thus students are tested, and, more importantly, schools are graded and ranked, based upon material that is not in line with the state-adopted high school standards we must teach. Where is the logic?"

Steve Lippi, instructional vice principal and director of testing: "Standardized tests have become the new Catch-22 for teachers and administrators. Teachers work hard to prepare curriculum, but so much time is taken out of the instructional program because of test administration that they have significantly less time to teach it.

"If they can't teach it, students will have a hard time learning it. Administratively, each standardized test involves such a complicated series of hurdles to overcome and logistics to figure out that, for a significant amount of time during the school year, normal operations are stopped while the school gears up for testing mode. It is a very poor use of time.

"This is not to say that tests are not valuable tools _ schools do use the data that is generated from tests to help evaluate their programs. However, when the school is robbed of valuable instructional minutes because of so much redundant testing, it is time for the state to re-think its testing program."

Joe Fuchs, English: "The sad aspect of this 'feeding frenzy' to justify the expenditure of funds to improve schools is to test students to death _ stealing time from teaching and learning. The tragic irony is the cure is debilitating the patient."

Liane Strub, English: "Unlike many other teachers, I do NOT feel uncomfortable "teaching to a test," since I am primarily an AP teacher and teach to a test all year. However, I find the AP test to be a genuinely superior testing instrument, probably because as much emphasis is placed upon the three essays as upon the multiple choice section.

"Asking students to write an analytical essay is equivalent to asking them to think. But the Golden State Exam is meaningless to all parties involved: The students gain absolutely nothing from it (except a silly piece of paper); the teachers lose two days of instruction; the school gets what _ another silly piece of paper?

"And the STAR testing is a sham. Everyone in the educational community understands this, yet we still jump through hoops to raise scores.

"Every state legislator should have to teach for six months before he or she is allowed to pass legislation forcing anything down our throats."

To summarize the feelings at M-A, I would conclude that accountability is a noble goal. However, when any organization imposes a dynamic that creates a 10 percent drop in productivity, there needs to be a sound and reasonable justification. I don't believe this testing frenzy could withstand objective review.
Jim MacKenzie teaches at Menlo-Atherton High School and is a member of the Almanac's Panel of Contributors.