Worthy Goal Is ‘Helping Tests Help Teachers’

Article Tools
  • PrintPrinter-Friendly
  • EmailEmail Article
  • ReprintReprints

To the Editor:

According to David C. Berliner and Sharon L. Nichols ("High-Stakes Testing Is Putting the Nation at Risk," Commentary, March 14, 2007), asking for high performance from every child is an outlandish request, because each child is different. But why should differences preclude high performance? Their reasoning demonstrates why the federal No Child Left Behind Act exists.

The authors also say that mandating the same rate of progress for every child is absurd; yet, the legislation does not require students to progress at the same rate. Rather, it proposes the same “due date.” Some students may reach the goal sooner, but is it really acceptable to have the due date as infinity?

When achievement gains are the performance measure, low-performing students are seen as assets, not liabilities, because a teacher has a better chance of showing progress.

Mr. Berliner and Ms. Nichols also find fault with the narrowing of the curriculum as a result of testing. Since conquering basics is often required before tackling other curriculum areas, however, some narrowing is not necessarily bad. The challenge is to creatively narrow the curriculum (when needed) without boring students to death, and then to expand it as students grasp the fundamentals.

The authors’ comparison of teachers to doctors should also be examined further. Doctors are not held accountable for outside factors influencing their patients’ health, but they are held responsible if they give the wrong treatment. Performance measures are a natural aspect of every job, and organizational-performance measurement is a dynamic process requiring recalibrations over time. As grade inflation increases, moreover, standardized tests may become indispensable because of their evenhandedness.

Though Mr. Berliner and Ms. Nichols’ Commentary presents problematic premises for its conclusions, the conclusions themselves warrant consideration. There are many ways the No Child Left Behind law can be improved.

Helping tests help teachers is a worthy goal. But there is virtually no funding at present for the infrastructure needed to do this.

Michelle Blair
Education Policy Researcher
and Consultant
Adelphi, Md.

Vol. 26, Issue 29, Pages 31-32

Published in Print: March 28, 2007, as Worthy Goal Is ‘Helping Tests Help Teachers’
Related Stories

Back to Top Back to Top

Most Popular Stories





Sponsor Insights

Effective Ways to Support Students with Dyslexia

Stop cobbling together your EdTech

Integrate Science and ELA with Informational Text

To Address Chronic Absenteeism, Dig into the Data

Can self-efficacy impact growth for ELLs?

Disruptive Tech Integration for Meaningful Learning

5 Game-Changers in Today’s Digital Learning Platforms

Keep Your Schools Safe and Responsive to Real Challenges

Hiding in Plain Sight - 7 Common Signs of Dyslexia in the Classroom

The research: Reading Benchmark Assessments

Shifting Mindsets: A Guide for Training Paraeducators to Think Differently About Challenging Behavior

All Students Are Language Learners: The Imagine Learning Language Advantage™

Shifting Mindsets: A Guide for Training Paraeducators to Think Differently About Challenging Behavior

How to Support All Students with Equitable Pathways

2019 K-12 Digital Content Report

3-D Learning & Assessment for K–5 Science

Climate Change, LGBTQ Issues, Politics & Race: Instructional Materials for Teaching Complex Topics

Closing the Science Achievement Gap

Evidence-based Coaching: Key Driver(s) of Scalable Improvement District-Wide

Advancing Literacy with Large Print

Research Sheds New Light on the Reading Brain

3 Unique Learner Profiles for Emerging Bilinguals

Effective Questioning Practices to Spur Thinking

Empower Reading Teachers with Proven Literacy PD

Student Engagement Lessons from 3 Successful Districts

Response to Intervention Centered on Student Learning

The Nonnegotiable Attributes of Effective Feedback

SEE MORE Insights >