I hate state-mandated assessments. I do and I am not afraid to say it. What I am afraid to say, however, is that they do hold some value. What is wrong is the way they are used to create high-stake situations. A student's performance on a third-grade ELA exam should not determine a teacher's salary for the following year, or her job stability. A fourth-grader's score on the NYS Science Assessment should not determine if he moves on to the next grade. These assessments can show us, teachers, where our instructions needs improvement for the following year and how we can best serve our incoming students.
Writing instruction and assessments are tricky. We want to teach writing in authentic ways. Why not? It is effective. It shows students that writing has meaning. But standardized tests do not provide authentic writing prompts. So how do we teach? To "the test" or in the way students learn best?
I prefer to think of it like this: Teach writing in an authentic manner. Occasionally, introduce students to a new genre. The "testing" genre. Just like narratives and persuasive pieces have different characteristics and requirements, so do writing prompts on standardized tests. There is a value in this (sometimes hated) genre, and we must show students how to tackle it. It should not, however, be the sole means of instruction in a writing classroom.
I have attached a list of quotations from Higgins' article, Teaching to the test…not!
Balancing best practice and testing requirements in writing (Higgins, Miller and
Wegmann, 2006). I evaluate and question these quotations based on my aforementioned beliefs:
How do you feel about writing and standardized testing? How should it be taught? Or, should it be taught at all?
No comments:
Post a Comment