<p>
[quote]
Id been feeling, the past few years of my 30-plus-year tenure in public education, that there was something or somebody out there, a power of a sort, that doesnt really want you kids to be educated. I felt a force that wants you ignorant and pliable, and that needs you able to fill in the boxes and follow instructions. Now Im sure.</p>
<p>Its not that I oppose rigorous testing. I dont. I understand the purpose of evaluation. A good test can measure achievement and even inspire. But this English Language Arts Exam I so unknowingly inflicted on you does neither. It represents exactly what I am opposed to, the perpetual and petty testing that has become a fungus on the foot of public education.
<p>I totally get where this teacher is coming from. I believe there’s far too much emphasis on testing and not enough on creating a love of learning from the start. Thanks for posting this!</p>
<p>I don’t know anything about this test, so I won’t comment on this specifically. In general I think it’s foolish to throw out standardized testing just because there are some issues - the alternative is much worse. Now, at least, you have the tools to measure competency in different areas against peer groups across the country early enough to be able to intervene. Whether or not we do anything when we find problems is another thing, but a test can point out you have problems. The flip side is also true - if you find a student is well above his grade level, something a test can show, you have the ability to place the student appropriately.</p>
<p>If you have a system sans testing, what’s to prevent teachers and students from doing nothing or very little, and feel happy they’re doing well. Are there teachers and students who would do better without testing because they can focus on the love for the subject? Of course, but there is a lot more opportunity for teachers and students to slack off because they will not be held up to meet any standard.</p>
<p>I’m sorry, but I don’t see any sign of criminal activity on this website. These look like standard assessment tests.</p>
<p>The teacher’s complaint seems to be that the test focuses more on reading comprehension than on how well the student thinks or writes. That may be the case and perhaps the test should require the student to write an essay.</p>
<p>Further, as inflammatory as her letter may be, the teacher acknowledges that the school allows her to teach a curriculum that includes the thinking and writing that is missing from this test. So she only seems to be complaining that the specific test focuses on reading comprehension, and not that her teaching is restricted.</p>
<p>Finally, the teacher complains that the purpose of the test is as “a predictor of who would succeed and who would fail the English Regents in 11th grade.” This caused me to think why the state would spend time and money to determine which 8th grade student is going to pass an 11th grade test. </p>
<p>State exams are used to measure the extent to which individual students achieve the NYS learning standards in particular subjects and to determine whether schools, districts and the State meet the required progress targets specified in the NYS accountability system and in No Child Left Behind.</p>
<p>I have no idea whether this test is adequate. But criminal? Come on. In my opinion, a veteran teacher should know that words have meaning. The use of the word criminal is such an inflammatory comment that she should be ashamed of herself.</p>
<p>People hate accountability especially when things important to are at stake. I see this in the teaching profession all of the time. Though I agree that standardized tests are only part of the picture in education, it is one area that one can easily measure. I assure you that the top school districts in our area do very well in standarized tests and it serves the kids well in getting into college and many other places that do require them.</p>
<p>I think this teacher is wrong, and calling the test “criminal” is just a bit over the top.</p>
<p>IMO, many public schools prioritize the teaching of “developing a voice”, “using our imaginations”, “being honest”, and “personal response” in their writing curriculum over teaching the development of coherent and well-reasoned essays that cite “facts”. This teacher seems typical, valuing creative personal responses (“how does global warming make me feel”) over the expository writing that is needed in most college course work (or should be).</p>
<p>That being said, the NYS tests leave much to be desired. The state has a long-standing problem with inflated state test scores and a history of teacher intervention skewing the normal statistical distribution of grades. And now they will be used as part of the rubric to evaluate teachers. I have my own ideas of how students are victimized, but it’s not the same as this teacher’s idea of “criminal”.</p>
<p>Mathmom, agreed. They had to dumb down the tests when they eliminated the option of local diplomas, and now everyone who wants a HS diploma has to get a regents diploma.</p>
<p>Are they anything like FCATs here in FL? The testing here is ridiculous. Teachers focus more on FCATs than their actual subject. The thing is they just teach you how to test not actually comprehend and get what you are doing. You see children going home with intense headaches because teachers put so much pressure on them about the tests. Their actual grades for the courses suffer b/c of the insanity of FCATs. </p>
<p>According to Michael Winerip of the NY Times, the student who wrote this Regents test response has a “pretty good shot” of passing the New York English Regents exam:</p>
<p>* These two Charater have very different mind Sets because they are creative in away that no one would imagen just put clay together and using leaves to create Art.*</p>
<p>After reviewing the questions and grading standards, Winerip concludes that officials have opted to dumb down the state tests.</p>
<p>The current state English exam appears to be the easiest in memory.</p>
<p>From what I can tell, it would be very hard to get zero credit for the short response questions of the test. Here are the criteria from the scoring guide.</p>
<p>*Score Point 0
is off topic, incoherent, a copy of the task/texts, or blank
demonstrates no understanding of the task/texts
is a personal response*</p>
<p>According to these guidelines, the response example given above is coherent and deserves a score of 1 out of 2. Based on other examples in the teacher’s scoring guide, it appears that as long as the student makes some reference to the text in question and demonstrates even a little understanding of it, he will receive at least a one-point score. There are no examples of “incoherent” responses in the guide, a possible indication that the bar is set very low for this category.</p>
<p>But the regents is not the test the teacher is talking about. If the test really is scored according todirect use or not of sources, and if the prompt doesn’t lead to knowing that that is what the grade is based on, then, yes, i would call that criminal. We’d have to see the prompt and the grading guide to know–if it is as described, I’d have a big problem with that.</p>
<p>Personally, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with standardized testing; it can be a useful tool to make sure the educational system is working. However, I do believe there is far too much emphasis on teaching to the test instead of teaching critical thinking. </p>
<p>I’m not sure of the complete back story on this, but it does bring up an interesting point of view.</p>
<p>I’d like to second ‘papertiger’ about the FCAT tests. They are totally ridiculous and tell you nothing about the efficacy of teachers at a particular school.</p>
<p>Schools, however, are now totally consumed with their FCAT scores and are pulling kids out of other classes (History, Music, etc) to prep them more and more for the FCAT tests. Kids are missing time in other classes to try to figure out how to improve their scores on the standardized tests. The standardized tests are not teaching them how to think, problem solve, or use their creative minds. The whole thing is sad.</p>
<p>The teacher writing is complaining that the 8th grade test is inadequate for the Regents. The Regents is so easy, it shouldnt need prep. The writer didn’t claim the test was scored according to directions, or that the prompt wasn’t clear. The writer thinks it is criminal that the test is one of reading comprehension and not just writing. If HER writing is so unclear that we couldn’t determine any of the issues you addressed, then she should look in the mirror for the problem.</p>
<p>Lauren, I dont know how hard the FCATs are, but where I live the state exit tests, the regents are easy. If the kids can not pass them, yes, I think they should be pulled out of music,etc.</p>
<p>No Kayf, that’s not what she is arguing. Her first point is very clear, that she already takes for granted it’s a poor predictor:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>She then goes on to make the further, more integral point of what she has learned through actually seeing the test and grading guide–this is the piece’s central claim:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So, again, I haven’t seen the test or the grade guide. I can’t speak to the validity. But the piece is definitely not about this test and its relation to the Regents–that is a preparatory side point before the main point is made, not something debated in the essay. the claim is about the stated point of the question and the way grading is enforced. </p>
<p>Reading comprehension is certainly important.</p>
<p>Garland, I never said the teacher was ONLY complaining that the test was not preparing the kids for the Regents (as if that should need any preparation), buy I do think that was one of her complaints. </p>
<p>I don’t see the teacher making any of the points you speculated about. Instead, she doesn’t agree with it, apparently because it is not “pure” writing, as she wants to teach.</p>