The Democratic Caucus at Harvard Kennedy School
by Mary Smith on February 10, 2010 in Dems v. Reps, Opinion
We can and should test the achievement of all students in American schools. School testing provides valuable data that can help us understand how well students, teachers, and schools are doing. Testing is an important part of a modern, accountable education system – a system that succeeds for our children and for our country.
But school testing is not a panacea. Testing provides one piece of data, a snapshot of a child on a specific day. Testing alone cannot encapsulate everything that happens within a school or even in a classroom.
A debate about testing is also a way to sidetrack from the real issue at stake – the future of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). NCLB has brought much needed attention to some serious issues in the education field, most particularly the achievement gap between white students and students of color.
Our schools should help all students learn and gain skills to be part of strong American workforce. Yet for the good that NCLB did, it did many other things very poor. NCLB requires that states set a proficiency standard that students must pass. NLCB requirements then focus on the gap of proficiency between the highest and lowest students. This gap is an important measure, but it is not the only measure.
Highlighting only the gap places intense focus on students at the lower end, ignoring the achievement needs and capabilities of higher scoring students. Shouldn’t an education system strive to improve the learning of all students, not simply those at the bottom? By using test scores in a multi-faceted way – instead of using them to measure proficiency levels or achievement gaps – you can not only close the achievement gap, but help students across the entire spectrum learn more and do better in their studies.
NCLB also used a false measure of “adequate yearly progress.” If schools do not meet this measure, the federal government will label schools to be “in need of improvement” That is simply semantics; people speak of these schools as failing. Those failing schools can face stiff financial penalties from the federal government. Adequate yearly progress is a measure that can penalize schools for what can often be statistical noise.
Education in the United States has a long-standing history as being under the purview of the states and localities. This national law tried to force a one-size-fits-all approach onto the states when it came to testing. The federal government has a valid interest to see that public education is of the highest quality across the country.
But NCLB has retrofitted an individualized educational system with constrictive standards. The testing requirements under NCLB encouraged states to make easy proficiency exams, so they can guarantee a high pass rate. The standards for students vary wildly across the United States. As one NEA spokesperson joked, “the fastest way for a sub-standard student in Massachusetts, a state where the bar is set high, to become ‘proficient’ is to move to a state where that word means something quite different.”
Recently, President Obama has announced new directions for the federal education agenda. As part of the recovery act, Obama included more than $4 billion of federal funds labeled for a Race to the Top. To improve schools, President Obama has decided on the carrot rather than stick approach. Rather than punishing schools for failing to meet set of standards that do not adequately measure progress, he is incentivizing reform, innovation, and improvement with new federal funds.
Coming out of the era of the unfunded NCLB mandate, this is a positive step for school districts and schools. These funds will be used to rewards school systems that are undergoing key reforms and making strides for their students. The federal government under Obama is looking to make the US educational system modern, innovative, and ready to meet the needs of the American economy going forward.
Comments
Got something to say?
