Teacher voices have been
notably absent in the recent controversy over the PARCC test in Rhode Island.
Articles in the Providence Journal have focused on the perspectives of
RIDE officials and superintendents, many of whom insist the test is fair, valid,
and has few problems (“Few hitches in first week of PARCC testing in RI”
3/22/15). Despite this, parents in a
variety of districts chose to have their children opt-out.
As educators prepare for
the EOY (End of Year) PARCC, it is important to understand what happened with
the recent PBA (Performance Based Assessment) PARCC. 298 teachers responded to
an online survey asking about their experiences preparing for and administering
the test.
Larry Filipelli,
assistant superintendent in Scituate, acknowledged that the PARCC caused a
“massive loss of instructional time.” Teachers agreed. One teacher
described how the average middle school student will spend 22 out of 180 days
of school taking standardized tests. 69% of teachers altered the curriculum to prepare students for the
test. One English teacher wrote, “I teach less literature and writing
every year because of time lost to testing. How is that conducive to
student learning?”
Mary Ann Snider of RIDE
stated, “Superintendents said the test questions were of a really high
quality.” Teachers disagreed, citing three problems. First, the
tests were developmentally inappropriate. Third grade students lacked the
stamina to sit at the computer for long periods. Teachers of English
Language Learners (ELLs) said the test measured proficiency in English rather
than content. One teacher wrote, “If students have an IEP (Individualized
Educational Plan) for reading, it doesn’t matter how much I prepare them, they
still cannot read the test.” A math teacher noted that the math content
was “unrealistic” for her ninth grade students. An English teacher
said the readings by James Joyce and Charles Dickens were inappropriate for her
middle school students.
Second, teachers objected
to how questions were phrased. One wrote, “The questions could be
interpreted in different ways.” Another teacher wrote, "This is not
an authentic measure of knowledge. It’s a measure of ability to play the
game.” Others noted that the questions were poorly constructed.
Third, survey data show
students had difficulty with the computer interface. One teacher wrote,
“If [students] don’t understand the tools, can’t type quickly enough, or find
the layout confusing,” then the results do not reflect the students’ knowledge.
As these teachers point out, developmentally inappropriate material,
poorly worded questions, and computer navigation problems suggest the test
results will lack validity.
Testing also took an
emotional toll on students. 78% of teachers reported that students
exhibited stress, sadness, and anger. According
to research, one key component of student aspirations is belief in their
academic efficacy. Many teachers wrote
that ELLs and students with learning disabilities lost confidence in the
progress they had made over the year.
Unsurprisingly, 90% of
teachers felt that time spent on the PARCC was pointless. They will not
see the results until fall, when they no longer teach the same students.
Furthermore, they argued they do not need standardized tests to show
student progress because they use various assessments throughout the year. One
wrote, “Any teacher can tell you what the student could or could not do without
PARCC.”
In addition to critique,
teachers offered suggestions for improvement. One teacher wrote, “Let’s
be creative and work harder to create assessments that are fair and valid for
students of all economic backgrounds.” Another said, “It is time to focus
on what we know improves learning: smaller class sizes, interesting
curriculum, inspiring teachers, and support staff to assist students at risk.”
These teachers echo what educational research has demonstrated for
decades, and what current national policies have ignored.
As a small state with a
new Board of Education and searching for a Commissioner of Education, Rhode
Island should place teacher voices and findings from educational research at
the center as we move forward in supporting students as learners and citizens.
We could be leaders in national public education by developing policies
that include the input of the many dedicated and knowledgeable professionals in
K-16 education throughout the state.
Janet
Johnson, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor of Secondary Education and
Co-Director of the URI/RIC Ph.D. Program in Education at Rhode Island College.
