|
|
Study Island: Bald Test-Prep
(Released to the web January 7, 2007) Two years ago when this website sneered that our schools were becoming nothing more than glorified test-prep centers, some thought the comment was just inflated hyperbole designed to incite a reaction. Today, with the news that Readington middle school is using web-based test-prep software in math and language arts classes and even assigning it for homework, former doubters have become believers. Could our middle school really have come down to this level? Unfortunately, it has. Students in our middle school are using “Study Island” web-based software during their math and reading classes in preparation for the New Jersey state standardized testing that will begin mid-March—more than two months from now. A flyer has been sent home to parents via backpack mail to let them know that students are expected to use the program at home for at least an hour each week and that the core subject teachers will be electronically tracking progress and keeping a record of what each student does. Those words are underlined by hand on the flyer for effect. This goes far beyond the test-prep exercises found in district textbooks at the end of each chapter or in an appendix. Readers can see for themselves that the Study Island software: doesn’t even pretend to be anything but bald test-prep. The company’s website helpfully points out that 98.4% of students who use the software claim it helped increase their test scores. It also notes that the “automated instruction” allows students to “choose between traditional tests or interactive games” as their learning method. Terrific! Traditional tests or interactive games—for what more could a student ask? Apparently they could not ask for human contact from a professional teacher or authentic learning in a differentiated classroom. Administration officials gamely offered a defense of the program, noting that the software is “adaptive.” The word in this context means that the software changes the questions asked of the subject based on which previous questions are answered correctly. But, just because the test prep is more efficient doesn’t mean that parents should not be alarmed that class time and homework time is being turned over to a group of profiteering programmers in Dallas, Texas. One school official pointed out that the state testing is mandatory under the NCLB legislation, and that all schools are forced to deal with the matter. That is true enough, but concerned parents are wondering why the school cannot encourage teachers to educate our students using formerly fashionable techniques such as reading literature, actual writing of paragraphs, exposition and practice of math concepts applied to real life problems, or communication and interaction with teachers not comprised of circuit cards and lines of code. Presumably a by-product of such authentic learning would be rising test scores? On the other hand, perhaps educators don’t believe that these tests truly measure learning and progress and that, therefore, practicing to take tests is a better way to bring up scores. Students in the middle school today were the students in previous years who were forced to spend time practicing and taking non state-mandated tests like the CTB/McGraw Hill Terra Nova instead of using precious classroom time for actual learning. These students spent their elementary years with the mile-wide, inch-deep Everyday Math series and have not necessarily worked out in the first four months of sixth grade how to reconcile the Egyptian multiplication method with what they are now asked to do on a state test. Since previous district scores hover near minimum acceptance, do these educators fear that it is now too late for anything but test-prep in order to raise scores? Are we just trading one problem for another? Whatever educators in Readington may think, parents and other stakeholders who are just now examining this development are flabbergasted and aggravated. It would appear that the members of the Readington school board were caught unaware of the use of this program, although the school board president has repeatedly used test scores to support his contention that our schools are first rate. Has this suggestion translated into more pressure for administration officials to “trick” their way to higher scores? For students, the use of Study Island software could hardly be more unfair. As if the high-stakes testing mandated by the state is not cause enough for stress and anxiety, now the school system is indicating by its actions that scores are the be-all and end-all. Students are being asked to practice test taking more than two months before the actual event, allowing for plenty of time for the children to ruminate over the soaring expectations. Is it any wonder that a persistent rumor passed around by students is that a low score on a state test means repeating a grade? More to the point, limited classroom time which could be used for actual learning is now being used instead to build test taking skills and to encourage short term rote memory and formulaic approaches. Goodness help the students who don’t have high speed computer access or even a computer at home or who have siblings competing for internet time on the single PC set up in a public space in the home—just as the school suggested for internet safety. The new world homework demands that these children be tied into the Matrix so that educators can track their movements via a long electronic tentacle. And track they will. Since this software provides teachers with “access to a private page where they can view usage statistics and results for each student” there will be plenty of opportunity to observe which students are struggling with their “state-aligned” testing skills. Let’s do a thought experiment. You are a teacher in a classroom and you have been provided with a “real time” statistical report showing six or seven children who are not testing well on Study Island. Your school board and your direct and indirect supervisors have all made special emphasis of the need to be concerned about test scores. Since you work in Readington there is a high probability that you are untenured, since more than half of the teaching staff has been replaced in the past two years. You know that your principal has access to these same statistics and, of course, to the eventual test scores. In this very real scenario, how will you feel about the six or seven struggling students? With the testing only two months away, will you feel the need to put pressure on these students? Will all of these factors change your relationship with these students in subtle or not-so-subtle ways? The glowing testimonials from educators listed on the Study Island website are easily contrasted with unprompted criticisms from educators and others posted elsewhere on the web. One teacher, “cageybee”, posted a note about Study Island on the proteacher.net message board in September 2006: “We were not impressed and so far have not purchased it. Although there were catchy little games, the sole purpose is for standarized test practice. Hmmm, is that what school is becoming? A testing practice center? When does the REAL learning take place? When does the FUN in learning and discovering for the sheer joy of it take place? I am so disgusted with the emphasis on a high-stakes testing score.” A student, Matt Schatsman, on the same message board had this to say on January 2, 2007: “yes our school uses the dreaded program, it's horrible, everyone in the intire school hates it with a passion, they even make us do it until we graduate.” Clearly Matt’s use of the program has not helped his spelling or punctuation skills. Any positive comments found posted on the web focus exclusively on test scores, not actual learning. We discover from the Study Island website that the software “offers all the benefits of workbook based programs” (certainly not a high standard to reach) and that: “The answers to the multiple choice questions are continuously changing position, and the numbers in the math questions are randomly chosen. This causes the students to learn the concepts, not just memorize the answers.” While such a statement certainly indicates a distinctive theory of learning and perhaps even a radical new epistemological model, many parents would be more interested to learn how there is time for this silliness when programs for the arts, science, social studies and physical education have been minimized and recess is missing in action or cut back across all grade levels. We are told that the “core” subjects are so critical and that time is in such short supply that we must concentrate our energy there, and yet a trip to Study Island is worthy digression for our children? Is this the best use of time that our professional educators can devise? Of course, our teachers are not truly free to speak their minds. One can only imagine—or at least hope—that there are some teachers who cringe at the thought of using valuable classroom time and even time at home to plop a student down in front of a cathode ray tube for an “adaptive” test-prep session written by a team of programmers unaware of what a real teacher does. In Readington Township schools, all the advantages of a wealthy community and of attentive, college educated parents are not enough to prevent the slide down the slippery slope of “accountability”. We’ll have our higher scores, but if we are going to pay this price, shouldn’t we count the cost? For further study:
|
