AJC Columnist Points to CSD for Possible Education Answers in WSJ Op-Ed
Decatur Metro | July 18, 2011 | 9:36 amDHS teacher Chris Billingsley points to a recent op-ed in the WSJ by AJC Columnist Kyle Wingfield, where he recaps the Atlanta Public Schools cheating scandal, scolds those who say that less emphasis should be put on standardized tests as a result (In his words “…that makes as much sense as saying the Tour de France should de-emphasize racing times this summer, or not keep them at all, because some cyclists have been caught doping.”), and points to the City Schools of Decatur for a potential solution…
Still, there may well be better ways to use tests to measure teachers’ effectiveness while reducing the temptation to cheat. One possibility that’s already being tried by a number of school systems, including the one in nearby Decatur, Ga.: so-called value-added tests, which gauge a student’s progress over the course of a school year rather than merely determining whether the student is performing at grade level. A teacher who brings a fifth grader from a second-grade reading level to a fourth-grade level, for instance, has helped him make up a lot of ground in one year. She shouldn’t be punished because he’s still behind.
Mr. Billingsley says “He must be referring to…the testing program we use (called MAPP).”
Cheers!
CSD students still take CRCT, which evaluates how well they have learned the Georgia Performance Standards. MAP tests the Common Core Standards, does not include Social Studies, and is administered 3 times a year. It sounds cool – it’s computer based, results are prompt, and teachers get detailed information about their students. However, I’m not sure it tells a teacher much that they shouldn’t already be able to discern from working with the students. In my opinion CSD loses too many instructional days to testing. In April, between spring break, MAP testing, CRCT testing, and then preparing students for both tests (yes, they do review for both), I’m not sure what was actually learned.
I’ll leave it up to the professionals to come up with the answers to how to evaluate students and teachers. Very difficult. The CRCT scandal is a classic example of “the law of unintended consequences”.
There needs to be something in place to use as a yardstick. IIRC, in my day (don’t ask!) the only measure of how a kid stacked up against children from other schools and states was the PSAT and the SAT. A little late, I must say!
Glad to hear the Decatur school system is working hard on this.
Here is a link that should allow readers to read the entire WSJ article (WSJ has a pay wall).
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303406104576443883731218922.html
I wish the State would allow school systems to substitute MAP testing for the CRCT. It gives parents, students, and teachers much more detailed information about specific areas of deficit and strength. Plus the results are immediately available vs. waiting for months when the student doesn’t remember the test. Plenty of students exceed expectations on the CRCT but have huge deficits on MAP testing. A bright, motivated child can work around their deficits for a few years without the CRCT reflecting it. That’s why, when parents think their child has learning disabilities that need specific remediation, they have to make sure that staff are looking at more than grades and the CRCT. It’s easy for overloaded staff to feel like “Phew, everyone at least passed the CRCT exams in that class.” Eventually the deficits catch up with the child when it may be difficult and costly to address them.
The only problem with MAP testing is that it doesn’t seem well-adapted for children who are not yet reading. Maybe that’s changed by now.