澳门跑狗论坛

With the testing debate showing no signs of abating, the U.S. Department of Education鈥檚 newly released set of principles on the topic aims to bolster states and districts in reducing the number of tests students take, while simultaneously calling for higher-quality assessments to be administered in schools.

The principles鈥攚hich are not mandatory鈥攁lso contain recommendations that students spend no more than 2 percent of class time taking tests, that no test be used solely for educator evaluations, and that Congress scale back on testing as it reauthorizes the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

The rollout also came with the Obama administration鈥檚 admission that it gets some of the blame for the wide array of assessments now given in the nation鈥檚 schools.

鈥淚n too many schools, there is unnecessary testing and not enough clarity of purpose applied to the task of assessing students, consuming too much instructional time and creating undue stress for educators and students,鈥� the principles read in part. 鈥淭he administration bears some of the responsibility for this, and we are committed to being part of the solution.鈥�

The 鈥淭esting Action Plan鈥� drew praise from some for what was seen as an overdue response to parents, educators, and others, but skepticism from those fearing it could muddle an already complicated system.

Randi Weingarten, the president of the American Federation of Teachers, applauded the effort to curb testing.

鈥淭he fixation on high-stakes testing hasn鈥檛 moved the needle on student achievement,鈥� she said in a statement. 鈥淭esting should help inform instruction, not drive instruction.鈥�

The Boston-based National Center for Fair and Open Testing said the announcement 鈥渂elatedly admits that high-stakes exams are out of control in U.S. public schools, but does not offer meaningful action to address that very real problem.鈥�

And AASA, The School Superintendents Association, said that while testing is a key part of the educational process, there must be a separation between testing conducted for educational purposes and testing for accountability purposes.

鈥淩esponsible federal policy in this space will look not only at the number of mandated assessments, but also at the manner in which the related results are available, analyzed and used,鈥� said Daniel Domenech, AASA鈥檚 executive director.

Building Backlash

Since the No Child Left Behind Act, which called for annual testing in math and reading in grades 3 through 8 and once in high school, the number of tests in schools has continued to increase.

The Obama administration, meanwhile鈥攚hich spent much of its first six years in office arguably upping the ante on standardized tests by calling for them to be a part of teacher evaluations鈥攈as instead spent the past year urging states and districts to make sure that tests are of high quality, and don鈥檛 take up too much instructional time.

The administration鈥檚 latest announcement coincided with the release of a report on testing in urban school systems, which found that students in 66 big-city districts surveyed took an average of 112 tests鈥攅ight a year鈥攂etween pre-K and high school graduation. The survey by the Washington-based Council of the Great City Schools, which represents 68 of the nation鈥檚 largest school districts, also found that there was no correlation between the time students spent taking tests and better performance on the National Assessment of Educational Progress, also known as the nation鈥檚 report card.

The testing system, according to Michael Casserly, the council鈥檚 executive director, was 鈥渋ncoherent,鈥� 鈥渞edundant,鈥� and 鈥渓acking a clear strategy.鈥� (See 澳门跑狗论坛, Oct. 28, 2015.)

Last week, President Barack Obama met with teachers, federal, and state education representatives and officials from districts represented by the council at the White House to discuss standardized testing. The president later posted a letter reiterating the administration鈥檚 call for tests to be 鈥渉igh quality鈥� and 鈥渨orth taking,鈥� not take too much time, and be just one tool that educators use to measure how their students and schools are doing.

Quality, Purpose

The president鈥檚 comments reflected those made by U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and John B. King Jr., Duncan鈥檚 senior advisor who is acting as deputy secretary, at a panel in Washington of federal, state, and local officials focused on testing.

Duncan said the goal was to create a system of high-quality assessments that would help drive instruction, assist teachers, and provide valuable feedback to students and parents about where their children were and what they needed to do to improve.

In answering a question on the proposed 2 percent cap on testing, Duncan said that quality and purpose were more important.

鈥淚f you reduce testing to 1 percent, and it isn鈥檛 relevant ... it is not guiding instruction, that is a loss, that鈥檚 a failure, not a win,鈥� he said.

While the consensus at the panel appeared to be that there were, in fact, too many tests given in schools, the focus was on designing better and more appropriate assessment systems and helping states and school districts to do so.

Educators should not return to the years when low-performing students were hidden behind the 鈥渃urtain鈥� of high-performing students, said Miami-Dade County schools superintendent Alberto Carvalho.

Thirty-nine states are working on reducing testing redundancies, according to the Council of Chief State School Officers, the group that represents top education officials in the states. The Miami-Dade district has scrapped 24 district assessments, which led to an additional 260 minutes of classroom time, he said. State efforts in Florida have led to districts cutting hundreds of end-of-course exams, he said.

In North Carolina, the state held focus groups with parents, teachers, and students about the kinds of assessments that would help them most before revamping how it assesses its students, according to June Atkinson, the North Carolina superintendent of public instruction.

At the end of the day, it comes down to passing the 鈥淕oldilocks鈥� test, Atkinson said, and designing a system of assessments that were 鈥渘ot too many, not too few鈥攋ust right, all for the benefit of our students鈥� growth and achievement in our nation.鈥�