High stakes testing

In Monday's Times, Brent Staples argues that civil rights groups should support...nay, he seems utterly unable to understand why civil rights groups don't whole-heartedly support No Child Left Behind (NCLB). His argument could be a nice something to think about. Instead, though, I come away remembering only one paragraph. In it, I saw what might be the worst argument logic I have read or heard since 'well he hit me first.'

Staples concludes that NCLB "could potentially surpass Brown v. Board of Education in terms of widening access to high-quality public education." This, because the law requires schools to separate students into identifiable groups--and if any one group fails in the testing, the whole school fails. This is indeed a way to prevent underprivileged groups from constantly performing at the bottom of the class. But, surpass Brown it does not.

The whole point is to provide each child a high quality education. And Staples absolutely skips over the important criticisms facing NCLB; incidentally, the biggest educational national experiment's in our Country.

Apart from funding, which is not an argument about the program but about the implimentation, the most important question regarding NCLB is whether high-stakes testing works. Reasonable people can differ, and various studies from states (such as NC and Texas) are providing various results. Staples, though, ignores the issue altogether. He simply picks up that favorite tactic of stating something as if it is unquestionably true: "The simple achievement tests required under the law are essential to the objective of closing the education gap." Oh yeah?

My concern with high-stakes testing regards the affect on Education in concept. We are, quite sadly, becoming a school-nation willing to teach to tests only. What is important, in that scheme, is getting the answers needed to pass a "simple achievement test." And because everyone needs to pass lest the school fail, we make darn sure to focus our energy on survey classes that drill in these answers. We focus, inclreasingly, on the what instead of the why. Such an approach might get us past simple acheivement tests. It will not create generations of innovators, thinkers, nor citizens capable of deliberative democracy.

And look at what we don't do. No longer is intellectual curiosity important. It is no longer our educative purpose to instill the ability to find answers for ourselves...Much less think for ourselves...Much less think vulnerably. Searching for truth, the great philosophical journey, and finding our passion takes a bumper tire seat to herding kids through tests via an unknowing answer society.

Of course, there are less societal-concern worries about high stakes testing. But instead of responding to those difficult questions, Staples picks up the lesser criticism that high stakes tests are culturally biased. I probably agree with his position against that argument. However, his response to it made me, for I think the first time ever, laugh out loud at a Times op-ed.

Next up is the antitesting argument. Civil rights activists commonly embrace the popular but erroneous view that the reading and math tests associated with No Child Left Behind are culturally biased or unfair to minority children. Paradoxically, those who hold this view are often middle- and upper-class African-Americans who have law degrees and Ph.D.'s, which require rigorous tests and high achievement.

OK, get that? Because people that have passed tests criticize high-stakes testing, they must be wrong. Staples relies on an even more bizarre version of the hypocrite argument (which is never a good one...calling someone out on their hypocritical position in a debate doesn't bolster your side at all). In any event, it was difficult to take Staples very seriously after this statement, and I will leave it with that.

High stakes testing might or might not be a good idea. I tend to think not. And so much annecdotal evidence suggests smaller classes, amongst other major changes, would do a great deal toward getting children's minds at work (Mike, step up to the plate anytime here). But let's debate the ideals, goals and methods of education rather than politicize the issue. Calling all civil rights groups to wake up and support NCLB simply because they are civil rights groups adds absolutely nothing to the efforts we all appreciate in bettering education.