Yes, President Bush, Johnny's Test Scores May Be Up,
But Can He Read?
By Harold Berlak
Center for Education Research, Analysis, and Innovation
School of Education
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
PO Box 413
Milwaukee WI 53201
414-229-2716
March 14, 2001
CERAI-01-10
Yes,President Bush, Johnny’s Test Scores May Be Up, But Can He Read?
By Harold Berlak
Many Americans are rightlyworried that their children are not learning the basics needed to thrive in thecompetitive global economy. President Bush’s solution is to raise standards bytesting both Johnny and his teachers.
The argument for the policyis simple: Provide tangible rewards to those who succeed, in the form of moremoney and access to educational and job opportunities; and punish principals,teachers and students for their failures.
Does it work? InTexas the scores are up, and the new President assures us he will bring theTexas miracle to the entire nation.
A closer look at both thesize and educational significance of the gains1 in Texas,California, and elsewhere tells a different story. The gains average 5percentile points. On a fifty-item standardized reading test, this is a gain of2.5 multiple-choice test questions – paltry considering the many billions spentin direct and indirect costs, and the enormous commitment of school time,energy and resources devoted to coaching students on tests.2
It is also important torecall what standardized reading tests actually measure: the ability to scanquickly the texts of a set of unconnected paragraphs and, for each passage, topick the correct answers to questions from a set of four or five alternatives.As useful as this skill may sometimes be, it has little to do with reading asyou or I know it, whether we do it for a practical purpose, for pleasure, orfor inspiration.
The questions surroundingthe validity of these tests are no secret. The Office of Civil Rights in 2000issued guidelines asserting that the use of test scores as the single factor todetermine retention, graduation, and college admission is improper, andpossibly a Civil Rights violation.3 The 1999 standards of theleading professional research associations assert that an educational test, tobe valid, must contribute to student learning, and that test validity cannot beestablished without consideration of a test's negative consequences.4
Numerous studies confirmthat heavy reliance on standardized tests degrades the curriculum andmarginalizes whatever does not contribute directly to short-term gains in testscores, including critical thinking, multicultural studies, citizenshipeducation, the arts, physical education, and bilingual education. Andhigh-stakes testing increases illiteracy by pushing more and more students outof school. 5
Among the mostdisturbing consequence of state-mandated tests is that the students whoare first in line for a culturally truncated curriculum and are most likely todrop out of high school are the poor, immigrants, and people of color.
If President Bush is tobecome the unifier as he promises, he must forthrightly address these concerns.
First, we must invest inthe education of teachers and greatly improve their salaries and workingconditions. This is essential if we are to increase the chances thatevery child is taught by teachers who know the subjects they teach, how toteach, and how to relate effectively to children, parents, and the community.Without competent and committed teachers who are paid decent wages, no test,however well designed, no educational leader, however capable andinspirational, will improve the quality of teaching and learning in theschools.
Second, the extreme inequalitiesin resources in the nation’s schools must not be tolerated. This nationhas the wealth and resources to provide every child with access to qualifiedteachers, a well-stocked library, up-to-date textbooks and teaching materials,and safe, clean, and inviting schools.
Finally, our politicalleaders and school officials must address the institutional racism that ispervasive in schooling policy and practices, which includes the reliance onstandardized tests for making judgments about school quality as well as aboutthe achievement or potential of individual students.
Bush’s call for more highstakes tests tied to punitive consequences will harm all children, most of allchildren of the poor and of color. Eliminating high stakes testingwill not, of course, solve the problem of providing all children with theskills and knowledge they will need to confront the challenges of the 21stCentury. But it would be an important step toward helping Johnny – andJuanita, Jamal, and Jane – to read and think clearly, rather than merelyhelping them take tests.
Harold Berlak is SeniorResearch Fellow at the Applied Research Center in Oakland, California, and aFellow in the Educational Policy Project at the University of Wisconsin,Milwaukee. He lives in Oakland.
1. At best the gains aremixed. California reports 4-5 percentile points on the Stanford 9. Texasreports as much as 11 percentile points gain on its own test ( TAAS). A recent Rand report, Improving Student Achievement: What State NAEP ScoresTell us ? (available at http://www.rand.org) shows gains of threepercentile points or less. On the other hand, the Nation’s Report Cardcompiled by National Center for Educational Study indicates a small but steadydecline in NAEP reading scores of high school students. (available athttp://www.nces.ed/gov)
2. Seven years ago, BostonCollege Researchers Walter Haney, George Madaus, and Robert Lyons estimatedindirect costs at 20 billion annually (The Fractured Marketplace forStandardized Testing, Boston: Kluwer, 1993). According to the BowkerAnnual, direct expenditures on tests doubled annually between 1980 and 1997 to200 million dollars. These are low estimates, given the proliferation oftests over the last five years.
3. See proposed U.S.Department of Education Civil Rights Guidelines on the use of standardizedtest scores for high school graduation and college admissions, Washington D.C.:Office of Civil Rights, 1999.
4. 1999 Standards, forEducational and Psychological Tests produced jointly by the AmericanEducational Research Association (AERA), American Psychological Association(APA) and National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME)
5. MCAS: Making theMassachusetts Dropout Crisis Worse. MCAS Alert FairTest / CARE (Coalitionfor Authentic Reform in Education) September 2000.
Also see:
Linn, Robert, “Assessmentsand Accountability,” Educational Researcher 29:2 2000.
McNeil, Linda, Contradictionsof School Reform: Educational Costs of Standardized Testing. New York:Routledge, 2000.
