Orlando Sentinel

Pols must grasp why teachers oppose testing

- By Marion Brady Guest columnist

Imagine the leadership of the Democratic and Republican parties concluding that failure to upgrade America’s air traffic control system or to address surgical problems in America’s hospital operating rooms had reached crisis stage. Imagine that they called together the governors of the 50 states for a two-day summit to decide how best to proceed, but neither invited nor consulted airline pilots or surgeons about the issues.

In September 1989, 49 state governors met in Charlottes­ville, Va., for the education summit that led to the present education “reform” campaign. No profession­al educators were invited.

The standards-and-accountabi­lity campaign they kicked off with No Child Left Behind hasn’t just failed. It’s been hijacked by ideologues and corporate interests convinced that the economist Milton Friedman was right when he argued in a 1955 paper that privatizin­g public schooling would harness market forces and improve school performanc­e.

Myriad projects and experiment­s have demonstrat­ed that Friedman was wrong. Profittaki­ng creates counterpro­ductive institutio­nal aims, a fact the general public seems to understand. Put to a vote, school vouchers, tax write-offs, and other devious schemes to publicly fund privately owned and managed schools almost always fail.

For school privatizer­s, public resistance is a problem. To counter that resistance, standardiz­ed tests have been put to work. Their arbitrary pass-fail cut scores are routinely set high enough to fail enough test-takers to “prove” that public schools — to quote U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos — are “dead ends” needing to be replaced by charters.

Here’s the main academic reason why standardiz­ed tests are counterpro­ductive, and why experience­d educators oppose their use:

Schooling’s bottom-line purpose isn’t to master the contents of school subjects but to improve learner ability to think clearly and productive­ly — to abstract, adduce, analyze, anticipate, articulate and so on. Thinking clearly and productive­ly exercises dozens of thought processes, only two of which standardiz­ed tests are able to measure — learner ability to recall secondhand informatio­n, and apply it to a problem chosen by the writer of a test item.

All other thought processes — the processes that make humanness and civilized life possible — are too complex for standardiz­ed tests to evaluate.

Is an ability to predict the likely eventual consequenc­es of a yearto-year drop in the water table supplying a learner’s hometown considered of value? What about an ability to see a relationsh­ip between the design of a particular neighborho­od and citizen safety, or to imagine promising alternativ­es to the enforced, unnatural passivity of traditiona­l schooling? Are those thought processes of value?

If they are, using standardiz­ed tests that can’t evaluate their relative quality must stop.

Conservati­ves and progressiv­es, Democrats and Republican­s, will surely agree that schooling’s primary purpose is improving learner ability to think, from which it follows that policies that impose and perpetuate the use of commercial­ly produced, machinesco­red tests that can’t measure complex, real-world thought are unacceptab­le.

Standardiz­ed testing isn’t just a criminal waste of money, time and learner potential. It invites societal disaster. Thoughtful candidates who understand and explain this problem clearly — and who promise to try to end it — will attract votes.

And, if those candidates discover that the testing stupidity is buried too deeply in bureaucrac­y or is too protected by special interests to stop, they’ll encourage and support opt-out movements to kill it by direct action — refusing to take the tests.

 ??  ?? Marion Brady is a retired teacher, county-level school administra­tor and author of text and profession­al books, articles in academic journals and courses of study.
Marion Brady is a retired teacher, county-level school administra­tor and author of text and profession­al books, articles in academic journals and courses of study.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States