About Those Tests I Gave You
Do you want to read a great Open Letter from a teacher to her students? I thought you would. This letter is by Ruth Ann Dandrea and it is really good. I am so encouraged to see more and more professional teachers “coming out” so to speak to voice their frustrations with high-stakes testing. We have an Education Secretary and a President who speak about not “teaching to the test” when, as teachers, that is ALL many of us do!
Let’s see what Mrs. Dandrea has to say below: This article was posted on the always fantastic Rethinking Schools blog which is really doing excellent work.
Illustration: David McLimans
By Ruth Ann Dandrea
Dear 8th Graders,
I didn’t know.
I spent last night perusing the 150-plus pages of grading materials provided by the state in anticipation of reading and evaluating your English Language Arts Exams this morning. I knew the test was pointless—that it has never fulfilled its stated purpose as a predictor of who would succeed and who would fail the English Regents in 11th grade. Any thinking person would’ve ditched it years ago. Instead, rather than simply give a test in 8th grade that doesn’t get kids ready for the test in 11th grade, the state opted to also give a test in 7th grade to get you ready for your 8th-grade test.
Non-educators, do you think Ms. Dandrea is kidding about 150 pages of grading materials? She isn’t. I test multiple grades because of working in special education and I do actually read and go through the CA CST & CMA testing manuals. I get depressed every year I do this because ideologically I am opposed to high-stakes, high-pressure testing of our students. Even worse, the results are then used to label entire schools and teaching staffs as “failing” – how is that for motivation?
But we already knew all of that.
What I learned is that the test is also criminal.
Because what I hadn’t known—this is my first time grading this exam—was that it doesn’t matter how well you write, or what you think. Here we spent the year reading books and emulating great writers, constructing leads that would make everyone want to read our work, developing a voice that would engage our readers, using our imaginations to make our work unique and important, and, most of all, being honest. And none of that matters. All that matters, it turns out, is that you cite two facts from the reading material in every answer. That gives you full credit. You can compose a “Gettysburg Address” for the 21st century on the apportioned lines in your test booklet, but if you’ve provided only one fact from the text you read in preparation, then you will earn only half credit. In your constructed response—no matter how well written, correct, intelligent, noble, beautiful, and meaningful it is—if you’ve not collected any specific facts from the provided readings (even if you happen to know more information about the chosen topic than the readings provide), then you will get a zero.
And here’s the really scary part, kids: The questions you were asked were written to elicit a personal response, which, if provided, earn you no credit. You were tricked; we were tricked. I wish I could believe that this paradox (you know what that literary term means because we have spent the year noting these kinds of tightropings of language) was simply the stupidity of the test-makers, that it was not some more insidious and deliberate machination. I wish I could believe that. But I don’t.
As a nation, we have been sold a bill of goods with regard to testing, we have been sold out to large testing companies who make millions off of preparing these tests. There is so much weight that State testing conveys onto students and schools without accounting for all the grey areas with regard to students’ lives that I would have to agree with Ms. Dandrea’s “criminal” moniker for what is happening.
Illustration: David McLimans
I told you, didn’t I, about hearing Noam Chomsky speak recently? When the great man was asked about the chaos in public education, he responded quickly, decisively, and to the point: “Public education in this country is under attack.” The words, though chilling, comforted me in a weird way. I’d been feeling, the past few years of my 30-plus-year tenure in public education, that there was something or somebody out there, a power of a sort, that doesn’t really want you kids to be educated. I felt a force that wants you ignorant and pliable, and that needs you able to fill in the boxes and follow instructions. Now I’m sure.
I don’t know if many of my readers know who Noam Chomsky is. I do, I have read a fair amount of what he has written and a couple of years ago I bought Manufacturing Consent, which is now available on YouTube and I will link directly below. It is dated, but prescient when Chomsky talks about distractors in society, basically, consent of the public that is manufactured to keep the rabble from realizing what is really happening: After the video, back to the article.
It’s not that I oppose rigorous testing. I don’t. I understand the purpose of evaluation. A good test can measure achievement and even inspire. But this English Language Arts Exam I so unknowingly inflicted on you does neither. It represents exactly what I am opposed to, the perpetual and petty testing that has become a fungus on the foot of public education. You understand that metaphor, I know, because we have spent the year learning to appreciate the differences between figurative and literal language. The test-makers have not.
Exactly, I don’t opposed rigorous testing either, but it must be done in a form and fashion that truly measures what our students know and there shouldn’t be the earth-shattering consequences that these tests carry.
So what should you do, my beautiful, my bright, my intelligent, my talented? Continue. Continue to question. I applaud you, sample writer: When asked the either/or question, you began your response, “Honestly, I think it is both.” You were right, and you were brave, and the test you were taking was neither. And I applaud you, wildest 8th grader of my own, who—when asked how a quote applied to the two characters from the two passages provided—wrote, “I don’t think it applies to either one of them.” Wear your zeroes proudly, kids. This is a test you need to fail.
I wondered whether giving more than 10 minutes of every class period to reading books of our own choosing was a good idea or not. But you loved it so. You asked for more time. Ask again; I will give you whatever you need. I will also give you the best advice I can, advice from the Nobel Prize-winning writer, Juan Ramón Jiménez. Ray Bradbury thought this was so important, he used it as the epigraph at the beginning of Fahrenheit 451: “When they give you lined paper, write the other way.”
I like that quote!
It is the best I have to offer, beyond my apologies for having taken part in an exercise that hurt you, and of which I am mightily ashamed.