Balancing the Testing Scale: Part IV–Purpose = Responsible Feedback

“Feedback is the breakfast of champions.”

Ken Blanchard

As we continue our look at high stakes testing, and how to create a more purposeful product, I want to highlight what I think is one of the huge flaws with our current system.  Providing responsible feedback to both teachers and students is something that our current testing model lacks.

Long Gap

One component that must be altered immediately is how long it takes to get the assessment results. By the time results are released, all parties are so far removed, it is difficult to use them an effective manner.

By best estimates, the results of this spring’s testing sessions will be available in the fall, five to six months after completion.  That, by any standards, is an extremely long gap.

The makers of PARCC claim this time will be reduced in future years. However, if previous versions of high stakes testing are any indicator, I will believe it when I see it.  In the years leading up to PARCC, our state standardized testing results were released later and later, not earlier.

Right Now Society

Our society has become such that we want, and even demand things, “Right now!”  We want materials, actions, and results immediately. Tell me you don’t get frustrated when you have to wait in a line, hit multiple red lights in a row, or watch the spinning ball while a video is buffering.

We have become a very impatient society.  Imagine if you took your car into the mechanic to get a problem diagnosed, and had to wait six months to hear what was wrong.  Or casting your vote on election day, not finding out the winner until the following March.  Would you accept paying $60 (or however much it is going to cost) for the upcoming Pacquiao vs. Mayweather fight, only to have to wait six months while the judges conferred to determine the winner?  Of course not!

None of those examples would be acceptable, because everyone understands the importance of not having to wait to hear the results in each circumstance.  The same should be true for testing.

So What if it Takes Six Months?

Here are three negative impacts from the delay in receiving results.

First, teachers work very hard during the summer months in preparation for the upcoming school year.  The phrase, “Oh, being a teacher must be great because you get the ENTIRE summer off,” is a complete myth!  Teachers work diligently during our “off” months, trying to get ready for the beginning of the new school year.  Though we don’t have a class full of students, there is little “down time”.  Now that we have a year of instruction and (somewhat) seeing the PARCC assessment, there are going to be hours and hours of planning and necessary adjustments.  Not knowing what instruction went well, and what didn’t, creates uncertainties moving forward.

Second, students will receive little to no constructive feedback.  By the time results are released, current students will be in a new grade, learning new standards, getting ready their next assessment.  By not having time to reflect with students on their successes and struggles, teachers and students lack a sense of closure as they move forward to the next grade level.

Third, the time gap creates a disconnect for teachers and parents from one year to the next.  It is difficult to address issues and concerns with your child’s teacher, if they are not responsible for a particular test score.  It is also a challenge to approach a prior teacher when they have little impact on your child’s education moving forward. This scenario is negative for both the parent and the teacher.  If a parent cannot have a meaningful discussion with a teacher, this could lead to venting with other parents, potentially damaging a teacher’s reputation and trust within the community.

Who is Grading the Test?

My second point with this issue is pretty simple.  I am concerned with who is grading these assessments.  There are multiple examples out there like the following:

Test Evaluators Needed (to score K-12 standardized tests)

Compensation: $11.05/hr contract job

If you have a Bachelor’s degree or higher, we need your help to evaluate student assessment tests. Come apply!

For more information and to schedule an appointment visit our website…

Please be prepared to spend two hours going to through the application/orientation process. Please bring two forms of identification to complete and I-9 and bring proof of your degree.

These are project based positions. Monday – Friday, 8:30am – 4:30pm

Position Requirements:

-Must hold a completed Bachelor’s degree or higher

-Ability to sit at a computer station for full work day

-Basic computer knowledge

-Knowledge of standard writing conventions and mechanics

-Availability to work Monday through Friday for the entire duration of a project

-Demonstrate flexibility while working on various projects

Ummm….

The following ad was found on craigslist from a large Midwest city. All I can say is, “Really?”  Is hiring temporary workers for such an important task, the best idea?  I could go on and on with this issue, but I would much rather hear your commentary.

Tough Task to Tackle

With our current testing model, these two issues are extremely difficult, if not impossible, to fix.  I don’t know how you score millions of assessments without a large brigade of non-educators, who are hired in the same manner as extra retail workers during the holidays. It also takes a long time to score all of those assessments, especially given how much writing is on them.

However, this two areas must be corrected.  Untimely feedback is about as much good as no feedback at all.  Feedback from individuals who have no buy-in to the process, and are there to simply receive a paycheck, is hard to conceive as valid.

Time to Chime

OK, so that is my new cheesy sub-heading for getting your feedback…sorry!  I have two questions I would like for you to chime-in on.

First, do these two issues concern you as a parent, teacher, or bystander?  Do they change the way you look at test results when they are released?  Do they create a sense of validity or invalidity?

Second, how can we work around these two issues?  Short of completely getting rid of the test, what good ideas can we generate to create a system in which responsible feedback makes high stakes testing more purposeful?

Please leave your comments, questions, and feedback below.

Thank you for reading this post,

Mr. K