Standardized Testing Pressure and the Endangered Curriculum

Recently I have read much commentary in the news and on various blogs about a principal who was fired from her position in Dallas as a result of false grades on report cards.  Apparently, according to the news stories, she was obsessed with making sure that her school scored high on the Texas state tests, so she eliminated music, art, science, and social studies in her school and focused only on test preparation, but she insisted that teachers put grades for music, art, science, and social studies on student report cards anyway.  As a result, her school's test scores did indeed go up, and her school was lauded as an exemplary school for two years, until the problem was discovered.  (This all came up in connection with the Washington, D.C. public schools hiring her as a principal -- see "The Answer Sheet," one of the blogs from The Washington Post, for more information.)  What interests me about this situation is that of course what this Dallas principal did was clearly blatant cheating, but schools and districts all over the country are eliminating music and art, and reducing time spent on science and social studies, in order to greatly increase time on math and reading, in order to score higher on the tests. One way of scoring higher on the tests is to eliminate or reduce everything else but focus on preparation for the tests -- this shortchanges the kids, but makes the school look good. In our own state, many Massachusetts schools are doing exactly this -- not cheating, we hope, but certainly many schools are reducing or eliminating their art and music programs and reducing the time allocated to science and social studies, and greatly increasing the time spent on test preparation in order to achieve high MCAS scores.  As a result, some of the schools that are being congratulated publicly for their excellent test scores may or may not be providing their students with the kind of well-rounded, thoughtful education needed in this day and age -- and, conversely, many schools that are providing their students with an excellent education are under pressure to change what they are doing in order to increase their MCAS scores.

In our district, we believe that student success is much more than achievement on the MCAS tests.  As indicated by the Texas "example," the huge risk in NCLB and MCAS testing has always been the narrowing of the curriculum to test preparation and the elimination or reduction of non-tested subjects, with a consequent “dumbing down” of the curriculum in the better school districts.  Southborough has been consistent in resisting that narrowing of the curriculum, in ways that we believe are crucially important (for example, maintaining our social studies curriculum and maintaining the discussion of government and current events within the social studies curriculum).  Because of this, comparisons among schools based on MCAS results do not provide a complete picture of our results with our students.

Student Achievement:

So -- how should student achievement be defined?  And how can we measure it in order to track our progress? 

As defined in our district, student success is much more than high scores on the MCAS tests.  Our district’s mission is “to maximize academic achievement, social responsibility and lifelong learning by attending to the intellectual and developmental needs of individual students in supportive classroom environments.”

Unfortunately, many important goals cannot be precisely measured.  For example, our goals for our students, include, among other things (and in addition to competence in math and reading):

>  Excellence in the 4 C’s of 21^st century learning: critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity;

>  Understanding and knowledge of history and government (becoming thoughtful citizens of our democracy)

>  Understanding and knowledge of scientific concepts

>  Ability to investigate and learn on their own

>  Appreciation of music and art, and skills enough in these areas to be able to enjoy them in their own lives

>  Fluency in another language

How can we assess our success in achieving these goals? Indicators of success include the following (MCAS test results are only one indicator):

>  District assessments, including both common end-of-course assessments, and teacher-made assessments

>  Feedback from parents and students

>  Private school acceptances & feedback from those schools (e.g., Trottier students’ acceptances at private high schools and continuing positive feedback from those schools and from parents about the students’ preparation)

>  MCAS results

>  High school graduation rate

>  College acceptance rate, and colleges attended by our graduates

>  SAT scores

>  AP testing results

>  Student success on national exams in different subjects (e.g., world languages)

Our students do, of course, need to pass the MCAS, and they all do.  But our goals for them go way beyond that. 

Current Data:

2011 MCAS scores:

> Southborough, K-8:  Scores range from a high of 92% advanced & proficient in 8^th

grade ELA to a low of 51% advanced & proficient in 8^th grade science

> Algonquin Regional High School:

            > 10^th grade ELA: 96% advanced & proficient

            > 10^th grade math: 91% advanced & proficient

            > 10^th grade science: 91% advanced & proficient

Southborough’s scores put us mostly in the top 20% or 25% in the state, with last year’s 3^rd grade scores in the top 3% and Algonquin’s scores in the top 10% or 15%.  Since Massachusetts’ average scores on the NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress, a.k.a. “The Nation’s Report Card”) reading and math testing are first in the nation, and Massachusetts’ most recent scores on the PISA (“Programme for International Student Assessment”) reading and TIMSS (“Trends in International Math and Science Study”) math and science testing are up with the top nations in the world, this means that the math and reading achievement of Southborough students is excellent.

Other Current Data:

The following are some other recent metrics that give an indication of the achievement of the students in our district. 

Algonquin's AP Test scores (2009-10):

            > 598 tests taken, in 22 different areas

            > The average percentage of students scoring in the 3-5 range was 94.3%

            > Algonquin’s percentage of students scoring in the 3-5 range was tied for 7^thin the state

Algonquin's Average SAT scores (2009-10):

            > Reading:  557  (39^th of 292 districts)

            > Writing: 563 (29^th of 292 districts)

            > Math: 580 (26^th of 292 districts)

Algonquin's Graduation rate (2009-10):

>  98.1% (tied for 6^th in the state)

Could we increase our MCAS scores without harming everything else?

This year, we have experienced a fair amount of pressure about trying to increase our scores on the MCAS testing; even though our scores are in the top 20-25% in the state, people have asked why we couldn't be in the top 10% or top 5% in the state.  I believe that the answer is that we probably could be at that level, but not without injury to student achievement in other areas.  If we narrowed our goals for our students and simply pursued a high ranking on one indicator (MCAS tests), we would probably do many things differently:

>  As many Massachusetts schools have done, we would probably eliminate or greatly reduce subjects such as music and art;

>  We might reduce the time allocated to social studies, since it is not tested, and eliminate the study of government and current events;

>  We might eliminate many of the hands-on investigations in science and other experiential activities in other subjects and just focus on material that will be on the tests;

>  As many other schools do, we would spend significantly more time on preparing for the tests;

>  As some Massachusetts schools do, we might divide students into groups based on test scores as early as 4^th grade and focus much time on extra test preparation for those who are doing less well rather than providing all students with rich learning opportunities.

As stated previously, one of the biggest detrimental results of NCLB and MCAS testing has been the narrowing of the curriculum to test preparation and the elimination or reduction of non-tested subjects, with a consequent dumbing down of the curriculum, other than in the better school districts that have succeeded in resisting the pressure.  With more and more pressure for higher rankings on the MCAS, we could drop everything else that we think is important and pursue a higher ranking, but it would be to the detriment of our students (and could also result in lower SAT scores, and lower student performance on AP tests, both of which would be harmful to our students).

  Currently, we provide our students with a full, well-rounded curriculum.  They all pass the MCAS in high school, as they need to do, and in addition, are as well-prepared for college and for life as we can make them.  In addition, while accomplishing all of this with our students, our MCAS scores are in the top 25% of scores in Massachusetts, which is first in the nation on the NAEP testing and up with the top countries in the world on the most recent TIMMS tests.  Dumbing down our curriculum to pursue a higher rank on the MCAS math and reading tests does not seem worth it.  We want more for our kids than that.