23 Jun The complexities of K-12 testing
By Dale Chu
The original eduwonk, Andy Rotherham, penned a worthwhile read recently on where we find ourselves on K-12 testing, along with the inescapable tensions that are part and parcel of the competing interests and aspirations involved. Rotherham correctly observes that the “holy grail” are exams that can “yield good information for parents, teachers, and in aggregate for policymakers, about what students know and are able to do but is embedded in the day-to-day of schools in ways that make it less visible and intrusive.” But is such a test attainable?
When I just asked my Magic 8-Ball, it returned, “Reply hazy, try again,” as the answer. Indeed, the lack of progress on testing isn’t for a lack of ideas or effort. Rotherham traces the many complexities: From Checker Finn’s call for a Space X moment on testing to the collapse of Imbellus, a start-up effort that I wrote about in one of my first posts here at Testing 1-2-3, it’s a target-rich environment vis-à-vis the obstacles to testing innovation. The feds deserve praise for trying with PARCC and Smarter Balanced, but the scope was overly ambitious, and Rotherham’s right that governance was a mess and there were way too many cooks in the kitchen.
At the same time, it’s hard to find anyone who doesn’t believe the current testing regime isn’t ripe for improvement, though like many arguments in our sector, testing has become overly politicized and we’ve lost the narrative on why states should assess students to begin with. I agree with Rotherham that solving this problem is as much about politics as it is about craft, but it will require that most elusive of ingredients to stop the muddling and make real progress: resolute and capable leadership.
Is large-scale testing then, what’s the technical term, screwed? Uncle Sam may not have a great track record, but like it or not the feds are uniquely positioned to help states look ahead after this year’s testing fiasco. Of course, therein lies the rub: The current administration continues to send mixed signals on annual assessments, and the politics of testing are particularly tricky in this moment. Unless we can get past that, it’s hard to see how the debate won’t continue to spin in circles.
No Comments