Are Comprehensive Tests Necessary in Schools?

There are two types of testing that are done in schools throughout the country. One test type is the Aptitude Test. These are usually considered predictor tests, on where the child’s strengths and weak areas are at the time of the test. These are also used as ways to develop future curriculum, (study plans) for the grade(s) that were tested.

Then there are the comprehensive tests, which are similar to the Massachusetts MCAS test. Much has been said about these types of tests and what they actually prove or indicate.

On the one hand, from many teachers' points of view, all that the tests do is have the teachers teach “to the test.” They focus on the material the test will cover and how to take the test. Simulations are provided to the students to familiarize them both with how the questions will be asked and to have them get used to the stressful constraints of the test, especially time requirements.

The teachers feel that there is much more that is important for students to learn, but since these elements are not included in the MCAS, they are taking a back seat, such as computer skill training, physical exercise, second languages and the arts generally.

For the general public, I am sure one of the defining determinations parents of students have is whether or not their child did well. If so, the test is a useful tool. For those parents whose children do not do well, there lies a question of what does this mean for their child? Was it the fault of the teacher, the school, or the test itself?

Many times we hear from students who don’t “test well”. Some children get overly stressed and this can lead them to forget knowledge that they had. Others' overall self-esteem and/or confidence is low. This can have the reverse effect where they question each answer they put down on the test and don’t get far enough into the test to score well.

For many critics of public education, these comprehensive type test scores are the only objective measurement there is that learning is occurring in the school. The disgrace of high school graduate illiteracy in the 1980’s and early 1990’s alarmed many voters, parents, educators and prospective employers. The idea emerged that standardized curricula was essential. They coupled that with MCAS-type tests to assure that a child graduating high school had the requisite skills that society expected.

This helped to stop the practice of what were called social promotions. Yes, a student may not have learned what was expected, but that child was getting much older and taller than the incoming class. Their peers with whom they may have long-term relationships had been promoted. Holding this child behind could socially isolate him or her. In addition, self-esteem would be severely affected.

The response from the public and the elected officials was to present a choice: was it worth risking some short term social and self-esteem concerns to the way the child would feel later when they entered adult society without basic skills. The first response to this problem was called “remedial teaching.” Colleges have set up special rank in classes depending on their own placement tests. Some high school graduates are required to attend summer courses prior to freshman year of college to get to the learning level they needed to succeed in college.

The MCAS tests prove to be distressing for the teachers. There’s no guarantee that a specific say fourth grade class will be promoted with all the skills needed to start that grade. This can be a result of language deficits, cognitive ability of the student or the skills of the third grade teacher(s) from whence they were promoted. Yet, as the MCAS testing begins in fourth grade, these students must all be “test” ready or the fourth grade teacher will have problems in their evaluations or reputations.

It cannot be emphasized enough, the range of abilities and potential for any group of children in a given classroom. All children do not enter first grade with all the skills kindergarten was to provide. A particular mix of students with disruptive behaviors and insecurities can make a classroom extremely difficult for even the best teacher. When a teacher needs to spend extra time getting these young children into order so that learning takes place, time is cut away from important daily class plans.

Teachers are also imbued with much of what we could call administrative and clerical duties. Student attendance sheets have to be accurately sent to the administration office by say 8:45A, and in a given class for the day, the usually not problematic task of getting the children to place their coats and bags into the closet was disrupted when one student vomited, all over several students belongings, setting off a major problem not accounted for in the daily plan book.

Teachers also have to get the needed documentation for those students who have free or subsidized meal programs. Letters from parents reporting that others are teasing their child require investigation. For much of the month of September, the youngest classes have to practice fire drill procedures that include not talking, not running, following the teacher’s direction as well as other staff and arrive altogether at their gathering spot in a very short period of time. Such importance is placed on this, that simulated drills can continue well through September into October. This is time taken away from the curriculum of the year.

Teachers are frustrated that after a year of dealing with 25-30 individual students with varying levels of prior knowledge and disruptive behavior will have all their evaluation reflected in the MCAS score for those children. They are the first to be blamed for deficits, whether this is spoken or not.

What is even more problematic is that special needs children have to take the same MCAS test as the children without special needs. Their ego development gets further deflated when they realize that “all the other kids” can pass the test and they cannot. This one aspect of the testing “movement” is absurd. How can you test someone who is intellectually unable to read at the grade level in that material? What, the system doesn’t want to molly-coddle such students?

I do not personally disagree with MCAS-type testing so that the students are tested to demonstrate that they have acquired a minimum of basic knowledge. However, the implications of the tests have to be understood by the general public. Also, the issue of special needs students having to be frustrated and upset trying to take a test they don’t understand needs “remediation.”