TEACHERS AND TEST SCORES

The Obama administration has declared that California and other states would not be eligible for a share of the 4 billion dollars in education aid from the stimulus package because those states do not allow the use of student test scores in evaluating teacher performance. Of course teachers must be evaluated. Due to the expanded opportunities now open to women, the teaching profession, which offers little prestige, respect, or financial remuneration, many times attracts either those who have limited options, or those who are truly dedicated. Inner city children are usually exposed to teachers who have had few cultural or intellectual opportunities. A teaching credential only guarantees a degree from a teacher-training institution and the completion of often mind-numbing classes in pedagogy.

So why not judge teachers by how well the class performs on standardized test scores? Certainly there should be an expectation that on a level playing field all children who have been well taught should learn and progress every year, and it should be possible to measure that progress with some testing instrument. But there's the rub – the field is not level and students do not progress evenly, or for many, at all, despite the best efforts of their teachers.

If the sum assessment of the effort, initiative and passion that many teachers invest in their classroom is to be boiled down to three days of test scores, they would have no alternative but to request a transfer an affluent suburb or other high performing areas – areas where parents encourage the discussion of current events, homework is checked, and tutors hired to ensure advancement. Areas where children speak English or areas where, since early childhood, children have been taught self-control and respect for teachers and rules.

Before testing, parents are usually instructed to have the children get to sleep early and eat a good breakfast. Easy – but consider the child who lives with ten others in a small apartment and shares his or her bed with several siblings. The parents work two jobs in a struggle to survive and speak no English – tests, homework and school lessons are not yet priorities for them, nor do they comprehend the consequences of removing their children from school for several weeks to visit grandparents or the necessity for the students to attend school every day.

For many families there is no literacy, even in their native tongue. These pupils do not learn at a yearly expectation, and test poorly due to very limited vocabulary.

What about those children who live in shelters, foster homes, or places so noxious that studies have little affect – places where the sound of gunshots is more familiar than the school bell and raucous voices and turbulence are the norm? How are their test-taking skills?

On several occasions, while testing a class, students were randomly filling in the bubbles and saying "Done!" How are their scores a measure of the instruction? And worse, we are told to test Special Education students at their age-appropriate grade level. An eight year old mentally retarded Special Education student was to take the third grade test. Since she could not read at all she was shown how to just fill in the circles and she happily cooed, "I bubble, I bubble."

And then of course, there is the "bit of help" rendered when the class looks totally bewildered by the first set of directions despite months of test prep work. It seems only merciful for the teacher to read the directions aloud – or to browse the test beforehand and go over a few of the pertinent math problems on the board or to quietly answer the quivering hands raised in the air. So test scores have risen – or perhaps more teachers have pondered the quality of mercy.

With the introduction of "No Child Left Behind," the total curriculum devotion to math and reading has squeezed out most science, social studies, music and art in order to service the state and federal testing programs. This formula negates any cultural development or refinement of thought. The need to focus on conversation, depth of meaning, nuance and the delight of reading has been sacrificed to teaching test skills. Yet most of our children still do not score at the "proficient" level in reading but at "basic", "below basic" or "far below basic" levels. So despite the time devoted, there is no gain and the children have been cheated out of even a basic education. Students have little to no knowledge of the arts, their community or the world they live in.

Although it is possible that proscribed tests do measure narrow, concrete skills, multiple choice tests do not begin to reveal the breadth and scope of an excellent teacher's talents. Only the careful observation by an edified supervisor can measure the creativity and energy necessary to inspire, excite, exhilarate and turn students on to the love of learning that will last a lifetime.