Strategies For Raising Test Scores

Grant Wiggin’s article, “Why We Should Stop Bashing State Tests” offers an extensive look into state testing and how we need to teach a greater understanding, how it would improve test scores miraculously in addition to not threaten them in any way. Wiggin’s writes this article from a perspective that says he cares about what students need to learn not only to pass these tests, nevertheless also to present them the necessary skills in life to succeed. “Standardized tests can give us surprisingly valuable and counterintuitive insights into what students are not learning.” He communicates an understanding into the world of teachers being reviewed for even thinking of looking at the tests before

“…only twenty-two percent of those surveyed said increased testing had helped the performance of their local schools compared with twenty-eight in 2007” (“Public Skeptical of Standardized Testing.”). Furthermore the poll indicated an eleven percent increase, compared to last year, towards the favor of discontinuing the usage of students’ test results for teacher evaluations. William Bushaw, executive director of PDK International and co-director of PDK/Gallup Poll also stated, “Americans’ mistrust of standardized tests and their lack of confidence and understanding around new education standards is one the most surprising developments we’ve found in years” (“Public Skeptical of Standardized Testing.”). All in all, not only are these tests a concern for students, who are forced to sit through them, hoping to get a decent enough score to place into a class, receive their diploma, or even get accepted to the college of their dreams, but they are a concern for parents as well, who only want the best for their children and to see them succeed.

This article, "What Do Test Scores In Texas Tell US?" by the Rand Corporation looks at the pros and cons to high stakes testing in Texas. High stakes testing was meant to improve academic scores and motivate teachers, but unintended concerns have risen. Professionals and the media question exactly how beneficial these test are, and if we should continue to use them. Texas was looked at because students had made huge strides in statewide testing. "Gains in Texas Assessment and Academic Skills (TAAS) reading and math scores for both majority and minority have been so dramatic that they have dubbed the 'Texas Miracle '" (Rand, 2000). The success was so great that Texas students were put through further test to validate that these impressive scores. Students tested on the National Assessment of Educational Process (NAEP) between 1994 and 1998. After comparing the scores for TAAS to the scores of NAEP many questions arose for the validity of statewide testing. Tables in the article show that the TAAS scores are differ greatly than those of the NAEP. Though the scores between the two test were much different Texas students who took the NAEP were higher than the U.S. average. Also, by 1998 the gap between the scores of white students and students of color got smaller. Questions about why the gap between the TAAS scores and the NAEP scores were so great were never directly answered. Suggestions were made that Texas teachers could more easily prepare students for the

1). To support this claim he further states, “Research and experience show that standardized tests are generally good at measuring students’ knowledge, skills, and understanding because they are objective, fair, efficient, and comprehensive” (Par. 3). On the contrary, Harris, Harris, and Smith state that “Achievement is more than test scores but also includes class participation, students’ course-taking patterns, and teachers’ professional development patterns” (Par. 6) They also believe student achievement involves more than scores on standardized tests. In fact, these three authors see the usage of test scores to measure student achievement as a “Dangerous Illusion” (Par. 3). To support this claim the three authors list a variety of concepts which cannot be measured with standardized tests, such as creativity, critical thinking, curiosity, motivation, reliability, self-discipline, and leadership (Par. 8). They also explain how all of these qualities are considered valuable by our society (Par. 9). Walberg fires back by saying, “Responsible test-makers, . . . do not purport to cover all the material students are expected to learn” (Par. 14). He compares standardized tests to national surveys, in which a small number of the total population is interviewed to represent a societies values as a whole (Par. 14). To illustrate his point, Walberg uses the analogy of a “Three-Legged Stool.” The stool’s legs

These tests will provide teachers and administrators a diagnosis of how the school is performing and in which areas the school needs to improve on. This will also inform policymakers which schools are doing well and why. Then that technique can be applied to schools in which the scores were not meeting standards. President Bush and the U.S. Congress have challenged educators to set high standards and hold students, schools and districts accountable for results. (Dept. of Ed, 2004)

Only recently with the addition of the Common Core Standardized Tests, students are being faced with more tests than ever. A typical student takes 112 mandated standardized tests between pre-kindergarten and 12th grade (Study says standardized...). In my opinion, the complexities of these tests are inclining to a degree where they are unreachable to the average student. These tests are an unreliable measure of performance with unfair instruction time. Student anxiety and stress has become so awful that the Standford-9 exam comes with instructions on what to do in case a student vomits on the test. While the tests are there for students skill-measurement scores, they aren’t the only one’s who need to prepare for the exam. Teachers are equally pressured by their overhead figures to insure student’s score well. Just like the students, standardized tests are an imprecise measure of teacher performance, yet they are used to reward and punish teachers. Teachers are being required to a more progressive teaching style with emphasize on reflective learning. The effects of this are being nicknamed “drill and kill” test prep. Developing a corresponding curriculum prior to these assessments can be tricky because of the ambiguous content the Common Core requires. A considerable majority of these tests are given to students online. These already pricey tests come at an expensive cost for schools. An underlining problem people are concerned about is declining student scores being used as an excuse to close public schools that already can’t afford for the computers to take the test, and open more voucher

The Washington Post published the story “2015 Superintendent of the Year: High-stakes testing is the ‘fool’s gold’ of accountability” by Valerie Strauss on August 27 about one superintendent’s discontent with constant “high stakes testing”. Strauss was covering the story of man who was named the “2015 American Association of School Administrators National Superintendent of the Year”, Philip D. Lanoue who is the superintendent of the Clarke County School District in Georgia, which is one of the most impecunious districts in the state. Lanoue believes that the constant pattern of standardized testing in schools is completely different from what he refers to as actual “meaningful assessment” and considers the tests to be unbeneficial for students.

A new study by RAND Corp, in Santa Monica, California found that “between 50 percent and 80 percent of the improvement in a school's average test scores … was temporary and was caused by fluctuations that had nothing to do with long-term changes in learning or productivity”(Olson). This shows that a student’s performance on standardized tests is too inconsistent to accurately display an objective evaluation of their education. Also, as the scores change each year, the ability to evaluate the teacher becomes difficult. In a high school in New Mexico a teacher found that “Students raced to see who could finish the test first, not who could get the most correct answers. … Former high school juniors interviewed this week said many students blew off the tests after being told that the scores wouldn't count toward graduation— unlike the required 10th-grade competency test”(Contreras). This shows that students do not take standardized tests seriously when it does not affect them directly. So, it does accurately represent students or teacher’s academic achievement. Standardized testing is not a consistent way to evaluate a teacher’s ability as well as track a student’s

Ever since then standardized testing has been a huge part of education. Teachers across the nation had to teach to the curriculum instead of what they thought the students needed to learn. Nowadays colleges strictly look at ACT and SAT scores rather than classroom grades, because they believe that some teachers grade on a curve and are not giving the students a fair chance. Standardized tests are an unreliable measure of student performance. A 2001 study published by the Brookings Institution found that 50-80% of year-over-year tests core improvements were temporary and “caused by fluctuations that had nothing to do with long-term changes in learning…”(“Standardized Tests”). Teachers are stressed over if they are teaching “correctly”. They went to a 4-year college, some even more, to get a degree in something that they wanted to do, either for themselves or for the children, and now they have to “teach to the test”. Tests can only measure a portion of the goals of education. A pschometrician, Daniel Koretz says, “standardized tests usually do not provide a direct and complete measure of educational achievement.”(Harris, Harris, and Smith).

SAT and ACT are just two of the standardized testing implemented in our educational system today. The score obtained from standardized testing serves is valid predictors of the success of the students as they pursue higher level of education. As with other standardized testing, data are generated that will hold teachers and school accountable. If the score is low, it’s because there is a need to modify the curriculum or the teacher is not doing their job as educators. But what if

Tests do not provide any insight to what should be done to improve the scores and to help the students succeed, that’s because these tests generally do not have enough material to effectively be able to evaluate one’s strengths and weaknesses so they serve no true purpose or benefit to

“Our educational goal [is] the production of caring, competent, loving, lovable people” . The students found in the schools across the United State are the future of America. They are the doctors, teachers, business people, lawyers and many other roles, that will be out in the workforce in the years to come. What they learn in school will impact them immensely; it is the responsibility of a teacher to give students the best education in order to ensure the common good of the future. It is essential for students to not only learn content matter, but also the skills to enable them to participate in a democracy. Due to standardized testing, the emphasis of education has become on score and rankings rather than learning. A standardized test does not look at the whole student, the scores provided are on a very narrow aspect of education. In the classroom, there are countless ways for teachers to assess the student as a whole person not as just a score. Standardized tests scores should not be the sole criteria for determining a student’s academic achievement.

A very current and ongoing important issue happening within the education system is standardized testing. A standardized test is any examination that's administered and scored in a calculated, standard manner. There are two major kinds of standardized tests: aptitude tests and achievement tests. Standardized aptitude tests predict how well students might perform in some subsequent educational setting. The most common examples are the SAT’s and the ACT’s. The SAT and the ACT attempt to estimate how well high school students will perform in college. But standardized test scores are what citizens and school board members rely on when they evaluate a school's effectiveness. Nationally, five such tests are in use: California Achievement Tests,

Although testing has been around for a long time, I instinctively believe that testing doesn’t give a clear picture of student’s achievement. Thus, I make strong connection to the following quote: “A central question has been whether accountability policies and standardized testing helping or harming those children the polices are most often designed to serve” (Skrla, p.11). For instance, when I analyzed and interpreted the TAPR of Richard J Wilson Elementary school, I found valuable information that all teachers should know at the beginning of every school year. Specifically, when I examined the categories of testing and the students’ performance on individual TEKS. This practice would allow teachers to have a clear picture of what exact skills and content knowledge students are expected to achieve throughout the school year.

by Karen Dorgan — 2004 This qualitative research project studied the efforts of a small public elementary school over the course of 1 academic year to meet higher standards imposed by the state. The state's department of education defined school success in terms of the percentage of students passing a set of multiple-choice, standardized tests in four core areas of the curriculum. The study looked particularly at strategies the school applied in an attempt to raise students' mathematics test scores. Interviews, classroom observations, and document analysis were used to analyze the effects of new