home | contact | faq

action items

If standardized testing, especially the norm-referenced high-stakes kind, is so awful, why is it that school administrators would be so enthusiastic about their use? There are a few possibilities. Let's examine three dirty little secrets about the administration of New Jersey schools.

Dirty Little Secret #1: The Pump And Jump

Unlike many other states, New Jersey has a lot of school districts. Over 600, in fact. Most of those districts have a Superintendent, Business Administrator, Principals, a School Board, and a host of other administrators. With such a large number of districts available, it is very common for Superintendents, Principals, Business Administrators and others to jump around to jobs in other districts. More experience frequently means more money. Bigger districts mean more money. It is not at all unusual for certain administrators to even draw money from two districts at the same time, after having a falling-out with one district, continuing to collect on that contract after leaving, and starting work at another district.

If an administrator can show that substantial progress was made due to his or her policies in one district in a short amount of time, chances are that he or she can find more power and money in a bigger district based on this extraordinary performance. There is just one snag. To truly transform a school district from a mediocre house of learning to a powerhouse of child-centered possibilities takes an enormous effort and way more time than the administrator may wish to work. It is not a two or three year effort, but a ten or twelve year effort that is required. So, what to do?

Some administrators find a shortcut in the form of standardized testing. Remember, norm-referenced standardized tests, such as the ones recently introduced in Readington Township schools, compare the answers of many thousands of students on a single test that was written to result in a bell-curve of percentile scores. The percentile score your child or your school receives is a relative comparison to how other children in other schools answered the same often esoteric questions. It is a relative score. Some scores will be high, some will be low, but they are high or low relative to other scores and not to any objective criteria. In other words, these are not measures of objective knowledge or skills; they are measures of how your score relates to other scores. Now, when these tests are first introduced to a school district, teachers and students both will find them unfamiliar--especially in the lower grades. However, let's recall that the teachers are also the proctors for these tests. As such, they have a front row seat to see how the children react to the test, to see on what the questions tend to focus, and to see what would need to change in order to improve relative test scores.

Now the stage is set. When the first scores come back, the administrators have a choice. If they are high, they can crow about how well the district is performing. If they are low, they can use the scores as ammunition for a radical change toward their own vision: our district is failing and we must change! In that case, it takes merely some subtle pressure on the teachers to increase scores on the next round of tests. Since the teachers now know exactly what is on the test, they will feel the need to coach their students on the types of questions on the test, and on strategies for taking these types of tests. Plus, the students now have some experience with taking standardized tests. Guess what? The district has been turned into a part time test-prep center and on the next round of tests the percentile scores of the students and the district will magically rise. Now the administrator can take the shortcut: pump up the scores, jump off to the next district.

Dirty Little Secret #2: Evaluating Teachers

It is hard work to run a school in a way that is child-centered and that eliminates doubt about individual children falling through the cracks. For example, to properly evaluate teachers for their role in the classroom, a Principal and a Superintendent must spend a lot of time in the classrooms observing, a lot of time speaking one-on-one with teachers, and a lot of time discussing with parents how they feel their child is doing with Mrs. Smith. Guess what: there is an easier way. Some Principals and Superintendents jump on the standardized test bandwagon because it provides a super easy way to evaluate teachers! What could be easier than checking the test scores for each class as a whole and using that criteria to rate that teacher? The companies providing the standardized test send back the scores in nice, neat packages, often in full color. If Mrs. Smith's class is dragging down the district percentile, it is easy to show her right on paper that she needs to work a little harder in her classroom. Never mind that Mrs. Smith has children in her class who don't take tests well, or that were coming down with the flu on test day. Maybe Mrs. Smith was so involved with individualizing lessons for her students and speaking with parents about detailed evaluations for their child that she ran out of time to prep the students for the test. Oh well, there it is in the percentiles on the paper: she needs to work harder. Teacher evaluation problem solved.

Dirty Little Secret #3: Creating A Buzz

Americans are a competitive bunch. We all want the best for ourselves and our families. Sometimes, though, in our competitive frenzy, we miss some vital facts. Standardized testing is often held up by parents themselves as a way to hold schools "accountable", though hopefully not by parents who have read this website! Administrators know this, and many find it easy to piggyback on the parental competitive urge in order to create a buzz about their own policies, and, therefore, their own career. When test scores come in, whether high or low, administrators will find parents who will get behind them either to celebrate the high scores or to castigate our "failing" schools for the low scores. Either way they win.

The trouble is, schools are not a sports franchise, a production line, a multi-national conglomerate, or a nation-state, but a group of individual children; each not fully developed and each requiring unique attention to maximize their potential. We cannot have some children "sitting on the bench", while others are quarterbacking. School is not a team sport. These are real children with individual requirements. Some will need more help than others, but, hopefully, when they are all adults they will have all the knowledge, the skills, the strategies and the confidence that they need to live their individual lives in happiness. Comparison of standardized test scores does nothing toward this end, it merely reinforces an empty competitive urge and erases the individual life of your child.