النتائج (
العربية) 1:
[نسخ]نسخ!
academic performance of certain students of color, or blaming their fami-lies and social-class backgrounds" (p. xiii) without seriously reworking the ideology through which academic performance is interpreted and ad-dressed. I have seen panicked schools adopt incredibly simplistic practices in attempts to raise the achievement of students from low-income com-munities, communities of color, and Spanish-speaking communities. Some of these include trying to treat children as if they were all identical, turn-ing curriculum into test preparation, or threatening untenured teachers with dismissal if they don't bring up test scores. In some schools, teachers are being helped to identify individual students for intense instruction based on the likelihood that their scores will rise enough to make the school or subgroup reach its target. Students who are too far behind are not se-lected for the same intense help if the effort is deemed unlikely to make the school reach its target.'In 1999 California had established an accountability system similar to No Child Left Behind's system, and now uses both systems to set targets for schools and subgroups within schools.2 Five of the eight teachers fea-tured in this book teach in our local county where, although there is con-siderable discussion about the achievement gap problem, it is not clear to what extent test data are helping to close achievement gaps. Test data are reported by school; it is relatively easy to find out whether subgroup tar-gets have been met for individual schools. However, using publicly reported data, it is not as easy to discern average scores of various subgroups, or tocompare achievement of various subgroups (for instance, Latinos versus Whites) across schools or school districts. The county Office of Education has focused heavily on raising achievement in the lowest achieving schools,reporting some success in doing so (Friedrich, 2004). But browsing through information made public on the Internet, I had difficulty determining ifthere was a general trend in closing achievement gaps among racial, eth-nic, language, or social-class groups between, rather than within, county schools. Although considerable data are available, analyses of such trendsare scarce. Teachers know whether their own school's scores are improv.. ing or not, but I have heard informally that they lack a sense of how wellachievement gaps are being addressed or how test data are being used to address them. None of the data I gathered from teachers for this book in_ cluded any discussion of how testing was being used to monitor and ad-dress achievement gaps.Below I briefly review controversy over reform by testing in relation-ship to comments teachers made in Multicultural Curriculum Design. in fall 2001 testing was not a major topic of discussion since schools were only beginning to feel its full force. But by fall 2003 teachers had a lot to say, mainly expressing frustration. Those who see standards-based reform_ Democratized Assessment 67by-testing as a tool for promoting equity emphasize its use to monitor the effectiveness of efforts to improve teaching and learning. For example, Reyes, Scribner, and Scribner (1999) found that four high-performing Hispanic schools in Texas used assessment for advocacy rather than sim-ply to assign grades or describe achievement levels. There, norm-referenced testing was used regularly to monitor progress. Testing itself, however, was not dwelt upon. Instead, the schools used additional assessment processes to improve instruction on a daily basis, making considerable use of au-thentic assessment, as will be discussed later in this chapter. The schools also regularly assessed students' proficiency in both English and Spanish; teachers understood that bilingual children may know more in one lan-guage than they can demonstrate in another.Many reports show measured achievement in specific school districts and states to be improving, and gaps among subgroups closing (Fuller & Johnson, 2001; Haycock, 2001; Palmaffy, 1998; Roderick, Jacob, & Bryk, 2002; Skrla, Scheurich, Johnson, & Koschoreck, 2001). For example, the Education Trust (2003) pointed out that the achievement gap between White students and African American and Latino students narrowed on the National Assessment of Education progress during the 1970s and 1980s, then remained constant. The report went on to cite high-minority, low-income schools in which there has been a significant recent closing of the achievement gap as well as outstanding academic performance on stan-dardized tests. Engelhard Elementary School in Louisville, Kentucky, and Hambrick Middle School in Aldine, Texas, are two such schools. Advocates of reform by testing argue that schools can no longer simply ignore low expectations and underachievement of students from historically oppressed communities, and that testing serves as a tool for addressing this problem. Further, advocates sometimes point out that since tests are used in col-leges and elsewhere, everyone needs to learn to take them effectively (C. D. Lee, 1998).Those who question the use of tests as a tool for promoting equity express concerns about three main areas: (1) the track record of standard-ized testing in communities of color, (2) curricular consequences of test-ing, and (3) inequitable student and community consequences. In regard to the first concern, there are equity-related historic reasons to distrust reform by testing. Kornhaber (2004) explained that "historically . . . over-reliance on testing for making decisions about students has not produced sustained efforts to improve educational equity in the United States" (p. 99). Critics point to the history of connections between intelligence test-ing and the eugenics movement, and the uses of testing to track students of color into lower tracks, classify them as retarded or in need of special edu-cation, and block entry into higher education (C. D. Lee, 1998). Townsend 68 Un-Standardizing Curriculum(2002) characterized this history as "testing while Black." Wiley and Wright (2004) argued that the "scientific testing" movement was biased:The rise of the modern educational technologist-oriented curriculum mak-ing and the rise of the scientific educational testing movement coincided with the period of Americanization and widespread xenophobia toward non-English-speaking immigrants and lynchings of African Americans and discrimination against other racial minority groups Thus, the so-called scientific testing movement of the early 20th century was intertwined with racism and linguicism at a time when the push for expanded uses of re-strictive English-literacy requirements coincided with the period of recordimmigration. (pp. 158-159)Leaders of the standards movement insist that today's tests are differ-ent since they set uniform standards for everyone and most are criterion-referenced rather than norm-referenced. However, most standards-based tests still retain characteristics that cause concern:[They] rely heavily on multiple-choice questions, language skills, problem solving undertaken by individuals in isolation, and time limits and content coverage designed to maximize the spread of scores Not surprisingly, therefore, on a range of assessments clear differences remain in average scores across economic, racial, and ethnic groups. These score differences continue to affect access to higher level learning opportunities for students. (Kornhaber, 2004. p. 93)Further, they generate revenue to test developers, confer political gain on politicians who support them, and confer advantages disproportion-
ately to students from upper socioeconomic communities (Grant, 2004). Many teachers in historically underserved communities have pointed out that "results of standardized achievement tests contradicted their first-hand classroom observations and assessments of students of color [which) re-
vealed higher levels of student performance on targeted learning objec-
tives" (Hood, 1998, p. 189). This was Mona's concern at the opening of this chapter.
Some of the teachers in Multicultural Curriculum Design were well aware of this history and wary because of it. An elementary bilingual teacher said,
We're asked to do this standardized testing, which is racist, it's based on a system of racism. It's normed to certain language groups, and it's basically biased against a whole group of other language learners. And we're asked to use it and advocate for a system we don't believe in. (October 19, 2001)
Democratized Assessment 69
In regard to the second area of concern, critics of reform by testing emphasize the impact of testing on curriculurn.,Assessment controls what gets taught; the press to standardize curriculum reduces the possibility of creating curriculum that is culturally relevant to one's own students, and substantially narrows how teachers think about learning or what they see as the purpose of schooling. Many reports document the narrowing of curriculum in which teaching to the test (and teaching how to take tests) substitutes for deeper intellectual inquiry, and subjects and concepts that are not tested are simply dropped (Hillocks, 2002; Jones, Jones, & Hargrove, 2003; Kohn, 2002; Lipman, 2004; McNeil Er Valenzuela, 2001; Meier, 2002; Stecher, 2001).
Teachers I worked with expressed variations of this concern more than any other. They emphasized reduced space for creative lessons and,,,ja: creased anxiety about making sure they teach what is on the test. For example, one commented, 'Because my school is so small our principal has asked that we share teaching art, science, and social studies. The anxiety that teachers feel to meet standards restricts their sense of creating toward 'inclusion' curriculum" (Mona, October 13, 2003). Others talked about their concern for making sure they hit what children will be tested over as they choose what to spend ti
يجري ترجمتها، يرجى الانتظار ..
