2 thoughts on “Problem Memo on Standardized Testing in NYS Public Schools”
You have made an excellent case for how serious the problem of too much standardized testing is in schools. I believe in standardized testing as one component of students’ educational assessment, but I know that standardized testing it is not the remedy for all curricular problems. The chronology of the ramp-up in testing during No Child Left Behind was persuasive and quite accurate, particularly the language of “increasingly harsh punishments” imposed on schools not making Adequate Yearly Progress. I was employed by the New York City Department of Education, and working in assessment, when No Child Left Behind became the law. We were dumbstruck by the focus on closing “failing” schools without supporting them with additional, federal funding.
You also made it clear that the testing is not always the problem. The statistics regarding the reduced amount of instructional time for other subjects are also quite persuasive. The narrowing of the curriculum to two high stakes subjects at the expense of areas that students might find interesting, like art, music and social studies, sends the wrong message about education. The suggestion that there are other places fiscal resources might be spent is very credible and invites investigation.
First of all, I appreciate that you presented the problem with historical context that smoothly brings the reader up-to-date with current policy on the issue.
I believe that you have made a great case for the seriousness of this problem. Touching on how students are disengaging from education because of the lack of a full and well-rounded education is a really great case. I like that you supported this with a quote from the President of the American Federation of Teachers. Urging to limit the emphasis and spending on standardized testing and instead redirect them to more supportive opportunities for disadvantaged students is a fair and just argument.
I think it would be interesting to see some stats on the effect these tests have on an individual level. For instance graduation rates and how they compare between the districts that had reduced instruction hours of non-standardized test subjects with the districts that did not have to reduce.
I enjoyed reading your memo. Standardized testing and how it is negatively effecting disadvantaged communities through funding and school program cuts really is an important issue. Well done!
You have made an excellent case for how serious the problem of too much standardized testing is in schools. I believe in standardized testing as one component of students’ educational assessment, but I know that standardized testing it is not the remedy for all curricular problems. The chronology of the ramp-up in testing during No Child Left Behind was persuasive and quite accurate, particularly the language of “increasingly harsh punishments” imposed on schools not making Adequate Yearly Progress. I was employed by the New York City Department of Education, and working in assessment, when No Child Left Behind became the law. We were dumbstruck by the focus on closing “failing” schools without supporting them with additional, federal funding.
You also made it clear that the testing is not always the problem. The statistics regarding the reduced amount of instructional time for other subjects are also quite persuasive. The narrowing of the curriculum to two high stakes subjects at the expense of areas that students might find interesting, like art, music and social studies, sends the wrong message about education. The suggestion that there are other places fiscal resources might be spent is very credible and invites investigation.
Hi Leah,
First of all, I appreciate that you presented the problem with historical context that smoothly brings the reader up-to-date with current policy on the issue.
I believe that you have made a great case for the seriousness of this problem. Touching on how students are disengaging from education because of the lack of a full and well-rounded education is a really great case. I like that you supported this with a quote from the President of the American Federation of Teachers. Urging to limit the emphasis and spending on standardized testing and instead redirect them to more supportive opportunities for disadvantaged students is a fair and just argument.
I think it would be interesting to see some stats on the effect these tests have on an individual level. For instance graduation rates and how they compare between the districts that had reduced instruction hours of non-standardized test subjects with the districts that did not have to reduce.
I enjoyed reading your memo. Standardized testing and how it is negatively effecting disadvantaged communities through funding and school program cuts really is an important issue. Well done!