Yeah it'd be great to teach students to perform well on tests but generating questions and making them take more and more of the questions they miss doesn't teach. there has to be instruction (not more testing) in between. So we definitely always use a cycle of analyzing test results, teaching to weaknesses, testing again...that's called "data-driven instruction" by people who feel the need to call it anything besides DUH...but the part that makes a difference is the instruction (based on data) not the data and testing by themselves. The danger, in my experience, is that test, retest consumes all instructional time. That's one thing I saw happen in some classrooms where I worked when they brought in ThinkLink (formative assessment platform).
and YES investing students in the test as something that helps them chart progress instead of something they take for someone else's benefit is a huge part in investing them in the idea of achievement and evidence that they can learn, change, grow, set themselves on a different (stay on a great) track.
The fact that teachers are teaching without understanding the standards is a little upsetting...teaching to standards was always our job - therefore so was understanding them...if they weren't doing that before what in the world were they teaching? macrome? Their own personal version of what a 7th grader should know? So having teachers be sure they understand standards is a great idea that doesn't have to have anything to do with testing.
And, again, involving students in the assessment cycle can only be good for motivation and engagement - they can see evidence that they know more when they work hard, and be proud of it. That's why teachers originally posted student work or had kids visibly track progress. Like I had a chart of number of pages read for independent reading. class averages on weekly quizzes - tangible individual and group evidence of progress...also not necessarily linked to a standardized test, but as proof of growth on a variety of scales.
those are great community involvement ideas and we have tons of examples of them all around, so totally possible. what's pie in the sky is that they aren't more prevalent (how crazy is that!) I'm happy to read some meat and detail behind the sweeping phrase "community involvement"!
I'm putting these comments out there because I think they represent a thoughtful discussion about "teaching to the test." Not meant to be critical of the work being done in Hamblen, just a peek into how some people think about it.
No comments:
Post a Comment