Tests don’t measure capacity for learning

It was said that when you listened to Andrés Segovia, the father of the modern classical guitar, play Bach, you were actually listening to Bach thinking.

When asked to comment about this, Segovia wasted no words. He illustrated his understanding of the intricacy of Bach’s endlessly ascending and descending harmonic relationships by playing them and then saying: “So now you see… .”

Describing music can be tricky. Trying to convey in words the meaning of the music, the emotional content or what it feels like to play a certain piece is not an easy task.

Even the very best program or CD liner notes describe only the structure of the music while offering some biographical background. That’s all very interesting, but only marginally related to the actual experience of music itself, either for a listener or a player.

In the same way, attempting to describe the infinite complexities of learning or assessing a learner’s capacity with multiple-choice, one-right-answer tests will fall short of any authentic evaluation. Much more is needed if the intention is to truly understand what the learner is experiencing during the uphill journey to new levels of knowledge.

Bear in mind that recalling the correct answer to a test question is only the first step in learning. It is the learner’s increasing ability to under- stand and then apply new knowledge to new situations that defines the purpose of education.

Beyond the application of new knowledge to existing or new situations, the expert teacher needs to have some insight into the learner’s ability to evaluate the worth of that knowledge, and then how to exercise that ability to create something original, or at least something fresh and different.

Measuring the degree to which the learner is succeeding at anything beyond simple recall becomes a formidable task, well beyond paper-and-pencil “one right answer” standardized tests or even written exams.

Winston Churchill famously explained his early frustrations with tests and exams as indicators of his intelligence and potential as a student: “When I would have willingly displayed my knowledge, they sought to expose my ignorance.

“This sort of treatment had only one result: I did not do well in examinations.”

No surprise then that, after decades of politically inspired obsession with standardized testing in the U.S., a recently released national report concludes that high stakes testing is not helping improve the quality of public education.

In fact, quite the contrary, as scores from the 2015 U.S. National Assessment of Educational Progress, often called the “nation’s report card,” show declines in student test scores in reading and mathematics for the first time since 1990.

So called Scholastic Aptitude Test scores (college or university readiness exams) have also declined.

After 15 years of test-based programs such as the Bush administration’s No Child Left Behind, a recent survey by the U.S. Council of the Great City Schools found that the average student was taking about 112 mandatory standardized tests during his or her school career.

To combat this test fatigue, the Obama administration has proposed that in order to reduce “over-testing,” school districts should ensure that no more than two per cent of classroom time is devoted to taking tests.

Depending on the source, tests are mistakenly taken to be indicators of anything from individual student progress to school comparisons, teacher effectiveness and the overall quality of provincial or national public education.

Politically, proponents of more testing claim it helps to keep the system accountable to taxpayers as well as parents.

Others, such as Grant Wiggins, widely known for his extensively researched and widely recognized work in assessment reform, suggest that while large-scale multiple-choice tests can be valid indicators of the most basic levels of learning, true assessment should require students to be effective “performers,” with the demonstrated ability to apply acquired knowledge in “real” situations.

To provide an authentic assessment of the status of a student’s learning, Wiggins suggests, the student should also be presented with a full array of actual performance tasks: conducting research, writing and then revising writing, collaborating with others to produce results.

Segovia chose to explain his understanding of Bach not by talking about music, but by transcribing, interpreting and then playing a prelude.

Judging the maestro by his ability to complete a standardized test about baroque music would have completely missed his genius.

Imagine what we might be missing with some kids if we limit assessment of their capacities and potential to results on written tests.

Geoff Johnson is a retired superintendent of schools.