Tornado Alley (PROG)

[fuagf]

Valuing teacher judgement .. curriculum assessment and reporting .. one bit ..

4. The mass testing agenda

As the professional and industrial voice of public school and TAFE teachers in this state, the NSW Teachers Federation, along with the Australian Education Union and interstate teacher unions, reaffirms its longstanding opposition to mass, statewide testing schemes such as the Basic Skills Tests. This opposition is based on the premise that mass, statewide testing is a shallow, simplistic educational practice that is a waste of public funds.

The push for mass, statewide testing regimes worldwide is part of the economic rationalist attempt to shape a narrow, utilitarian, marketised and impoverished agenda for education. Thus, it has its origins in sources external to education policy makers and teachers. Corporate interests and conservative politicians have been its most assiduous advocates, accompanying their demands with baseless moral panic about alleged "falling standards" in education. They have found it a convenient device for scapegoating teachers in order to divert attention from the deficiencies of Government and administration in providing proper resources and policies for schools and teachers. Some education policy makers, despite their better instincts, have attempted to provide a rationale for mass, statewide tests.

In NSW the mass, statewide testing agenda was introduced under the discredited Metherell regime but was supported and later extended by the Carr-led Labor Party in opposition and government.

The test "industry" which has been spawned as a result of the introduction of mass, statewide testing has had the effect of taking the work of evaluation of teaching and learning away from the professionals most capable of and responsible for it.

The Federation's objections to mass, statewide testing regimes are based on the following:

* A mass, statewide test is not an accurate measure of the total of students' understandings, skills and general abilities.

* Measurable outcomes may be the least significant results of learning. It's easier to quantify how many semicolons are used correctly in an essay than how many wonderful ideas it contains. Those who have an obsession with "specific, measurable standards" end up dumbing down the process of learning. Educators aim to nurture intrinsic motivation and a desire for intellectual exploration.

* Mass, statewide testing advocates see testing essentially as an enforcement mechanism. This is an insulting view of educators, and is based on an assumption that teachers cannot be trusted.

* Mass, statewide tests necessarily create failure. Despite the rhetoric of its advocates, this form of testing is not about helping all children to become better learners. It is, in fact, a device for artificially categorising, ranking and labelling students, school communities and schooling systems.

* The inevitable pressure to raise scores means that there is less time to actively engage students' minds through in-depth study of issues, hands-on experiences and inquiry which promote a genuine passion for learning.

* Mass, statewide tests tend to measure the temporary acquisition of facts and skills. This promotes a reliance on direct-instruction techniques and endless practice tests, including the skill of test taking itself, rather than genuine understanding. Skills-based instruction tends to foster low-level uniformity and subvert academic potential. The quality of learning declines most for those who have least motivation.

* Annual reports do not allow a balance of reporting of all aspects of student learning and reflect a bias towards the reporting of mass, statewide test results.

* Mass, statewide tests inevitably reflect social and cultural biases. The questions require a set of knowledge, skills and understandings more likely to be possessed by children from certain cultural backgrounds and therefore alienate a significant proportion of our students.

* The inequities of such tests are exacerbated by socio-economic factors. Affluent families have more access to a better-resourced environment; for example, often purchasing commercially produced materials and hiring tutors. .. more ..

http://www.nswtf.org.au/journal_extras/vtjudge.html