Brand New Assessments, Same Old Problems?

Once a month in my district, Monday morning means a late start day. A late start for kids means inservice for teachers. Unfortunately, this word, "inservice," has come to be a dirty word in our profession...It's a word that makes teachers cringe. However, this Monday, I was looking forward to our inservice: We had the chance to look into and play around in the new state of Wisconsin student data storage system that houses all kinds of useful data on students and displays this data in graphs and charts that are easily understood (I love data!!!!!!). After this, we got into small groups and investigated the new ACT testing suite. 

This was when things started getting interesting. Working in a small group, we made our way through samples of the new ACT Aspire test and the ACT WorkKeys test. The experience we had as teachers was interesting and thought provoking. 

Here are a few thoughts that were bouncing around inside my head:

1. I'm not an expert in math or language arts, but I'm pretty sure most freshmen and sophomores would have a hard time with the ACT Aspire exam. Not because of the rigor of the content, rather, the format of the questions is somewhat intimidating and inaccessible. The inaccessibility is magnified by the fact that these tests are taken on a computer. Even though the kids in question are digital natives, being able to skillfully and critically read on a computer screen during a high stakes test is not a skill set they possess. This is the result of a variety of factors including lack of student educational access to technology from very young ages and antiquated assessment delivery methods (paper and pencil) currently used by teachers.
2. Even if they had the skills, the content is not relevant. Again, I don't claim to be an expert when it comes to writing high stakes testing, but if the questions on any exam are relevant or are at least mildly interesting, kids invest more time and energy into solving them. I had a great discussion with one of our science teachers about a series of questions on the science section of the ACT Aspire that related to a diagram that was followed by a chart that was followed by a table that was followed by two graphs that were to be used to determine the area of coverage of a cell phone tower and something about the frequency of waves (or something like that). He made the point that the average student would be strongly tempted to simply skip to the questions about all of this data and select an answer randomly than actually go through all of the work required. This would be especially true, in his opinion, if students encountered this at the end of the science section after already working through all the previous problems. My thought was this: "Was this really the most interesting/relevant way to test for this particular knowledge?" 
3. Every student will be taking these?- I hope you have had the conversation in your own district about the reality that all kids will not go to a four year university and some might not even go to a two year program. Here's what I think is a reality: Some kids simply need to get basic academic skills and then enter into some sort of apprenticeship or other job training program. This reality is clearly not shared by the state of Wisconsin DPI with its adoption of the ACT suite (or at least that was the case last I heard). When I encountered the section on the ACT Aspire math sample questions that asked to find the units digits of seven raised to the fiftieth power, I actually said aloud, "Nope" and then turned to ask the calculus teacher what the point was of being able to do such a task. His answer of how it allows students to identify patterns sated my frustration until I thought the following: "Does every single kid need to be able to do this?" Which was followed by: "Is it a realistic expectation that every high school person and therefore, eventually, every person, should be able to do this?" To which I answered: "Nope."
4. There is a disconnect between high stakes tests and trends in classroom teaching methods. Differentiation, individualized learning plans, project-based learning... there are so many trends and buzzwords in education right now that have to do with addressing the specific needs of each and every student and they are wonderful at accomplishing all kinds of things. Project based learning is one in particular that I love because it puts the ownership of learning in the hands of the students. This can lead to students becoming self-motivated learners who are passionate about the content they encounter. In addition to the educational benefits of these individualized learning models, there is this fact to consider: Every person is different, has different needs, different life experiences, different interests, and different goals in life. So I ask you this: How does the trend towards more individualized learning and assessment methods jive with the fact that we require every student to sit down and take the same exact test on a computer many times a year?

Implications for my classroom-

This initial exposure to the new Wisconsin data source and the ACT suite during our inservice has opened my eyes to many new things that have the potential to dramatically impact the way I do things in my classroom. The data will most certainly be useful in determining how to meet the specific learning needs of the children in my classroom. It is all housed under one roof and, after my initial session of exploring and playing around, it appears to be extremely quick and easy to navigate around to locate valuable information that will actually be very useful! Too often finding and then analyzing student data can eat up a lot of valuable time. This new system appears to offer a solution to that problem that will allow me to better meet the needs of my students! I am less excited about the potential impact the new ACT suite and smarter balanced assessments are going to have on the way teachers teach. If measuring teacher effectiveness continues to be tied more and more to standardized testing, the pressure to "teach to the test" will continue to grow. This, I believe, will lead to less interesting, irrelevant content being delivered to students while creating disengaged, disheartened teachers. Do teachers need to be held accountable for student learning? Yes. Should standardized test scores be a part of this accountability? That's a question for another discussion. Does the ACT suite of tests assess valuable skills? Certainly! But, does a one-size fits-all assessment fit with the trend of personalized education? Nope. It will certainly be interesting to see how this all plays out in the coming years!

What do you think? Have you encountered the new Wisconsin data storage system? Do you think it will be easier to find valuable and necessary student data? How about the ACT suite?- Do you share my feelings and fears about these new tests or standardized test as a whole? Or, do you think these assessments are extremely valuable? Please share your comments below!

Update 12/13/13: I received the following from one of our district's principals today: http://goo.gl/hAOEK4. It's a document from the Wis. DPI regarding the new Smarter Balanced Assessments that addresses a number of the concerns I presented above. If you have a moment, give it a read!