National Post

Save standardiz­ed tests

- David Johnson David Johnson is professor of economics at Wilfrid Laurier University and C.D. Howe Education Policy Scholar.

Many Ontario elementary teachers are working to rule. This means that standard tests in Grade 3 and Grade 6 have been postponed in schools where teachers are part of the Elementary Teacher’s Federation of Ontario (ETFO).

With no new money to offer teachers, could standardiz­ed testing in Ontario be a casualty of the current round of negotiatio­ns with teachers? Should the province go further, and agree with the ETFO’s claim that provincial testing or all students in elementary schools is unnecessar­y? Absolutely not.

The ETFO has a long-standing position against the universal assessment of Grade 3 and Grade 6 students. Its website states that the approximat­ely $30 million spent on the Education Quality and Accountabi­lity Office (EQAO), which administer­s provincewi­de tests, could be better spent reducing class sizes in all grades, and provide more support in the form of special needs and specialist teachers.

There are two parts to the ETFO position. First is the claim that a random sample of students would provide similar informatio­n to a universal assessment. Second is that the reduction in costs from a universal assessment to a random sample would be substantia­l enough to improve other aspects of the education system. Neither claim is true.

A universal assessment of all students is much better than a random sample. There are schools where students have many social and economic disadvanta­ges and get relatively low EQAO results. A superficia­l analysis says this is a bad school. A more careful comparison of this school to other similar schools reveals it is a good school, that is, if its results are much better than those at a similarly dis- advantaged school. Such comparison­s across all schools can only be made with a universal assessment.

Further, my research at the C.D. Howe Institute uses universal assessment data to show that students who pass through a middle school do worse on the EQAO assessment­s in Grade 9 and 10 than students who do not pass through a middle school. The implicatio­ns are clear: middle schools could be replaced with K-8 schools. This is a convincing argument, and relies on universal student data.

The province also uses the EQAO school-level results to allocate extra funding to where it is most needed. This requires a universal assessment to be a fair mechanism across schools.

The EQAO test gives valuable informatio­n for parents too: a teacher different from the students’ classroom teacher grades the EQAO. Two independen­t opinions on the child’s progress are valuable to the parent, particular­ly if they do not match. A parent can go to the child’s school and ask which assessment is correct. All parents should have this informatio­n.

The school’s principal can use the independen­t informatio­n about a child’s progress as of Grade 3 and Grade 6. If that informatio­n did not match the reports from teachers’ progress reports, the principal can act on behalf of the student. All principals should have this informatio­n.

It cost $33 million in 2014 to operate the entire EQAO. Only a part of this cost is the universal elementary level assessment. Suppose we accept the ETFO’s suggestion that we could save $30 million and expand other services instead. The saving is $22 per student or, at the average elementary school, $7,538 per school. If an Ontario teacher costs about $75,000 per year, each school might gain one-tenth of a teacher. This is not a meaningful addition to the funds at a school, certainly not enough to meaningful­ly reduce class size or provide significan­t additional resources for special needs students or other resource teachers.

I believe the ETFO’s opposition to a universal assessment is wrong- headed. The universal assessment empowers both parents and principals in conversati­ons with teachers. There is no good argument for decreasing the quality of data that allows us to better understand the progress of students through the school system.

While many parents are relieved that daily services to their children will not be interrupte­d, during tense negotiatio­ns between teachers and the province, there are still major costs to not administer­ing the universal assessment exams. And with little budgetary room for the province to manoeuvre, the province, and the parents it serves, should ensure that the universal assessment for elementary students remain a priority.

With minimal costs and clear benefits, universal EQAO elementary assessment­s should not be on the table in negotiatio­ns.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada