This blog--the first in a series on testing--is written by guest blogger and Teacher Leaders Network member Marjorie Larner, an instructional coach and facilitator in Colorado.

"Now that the Data Quality Campaign has put
data quality on the map, we need to work together to leverage this work and
push it to the next level by using data to drive reform. The path to real reform begins with the
truth - and we must keep facing the truth and finding the answers until
every classroom has a great teacher, and every child has an education that
prepares him for college, for work, and for life."  Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, Data
Quality Campaign Forum.

What is Secretary Duncan using as the basis
for this truth he says we must face? What does he
think constitutes data that
is evidence of the truth about
education to prepare children for college, work and life? We have been immersed
in data-driven instruction and decision-making. Some schools are now wholly devoted
to producing good data, defined by standardized test scores. Students’ success
or failure depends on test performance, with perhaps a nod to graduation or
attendance rates. Secretary Duncan calls for "data driven school reform"--while
President Obama acknowledges that using standardized test scores as the measure
of good or bad teaching creates other problems.

These kinds of public statements demand a
definition of specific outcomes aligned with instruments that gather valid,
reliable and relevant data--all  kinds of
evidence of student progress toward agreed-upon outcomes. Those of us working
in the field now have an opportunity to offer advice and ideas based on our
real work experience--because as of this moment, we are still committed to standardized
tests.

Here's a story about a school I worked in
many years ago. Their test scores were very high. One year, all 3rd graders got
a perfect score in reading, but the numbers for writing were weaker. In the
following years, the district used this information to launch a required
school-wide focus on writing. We gave the kids the message that they were weak
in writing, and needed to improve.  We also
paid for a few released test items ($7 for one student’s response to one item),
to analyze these weaknesses. We realized that the students were all proficient
and advanced on the actual writing samples. It was the multiple-choice
questions, where they had to choose an answer with no context, where they lost
points. What did this tell us about the data we had used to “drive” our
instruction for several years? They knew how to apply the rules to actual
writing, but their actual “weakness” was choosing between tricky
multiple-choice answers on isolated rules for writing. Should we spend less
time teaching them to be writers, in order to work on testing strategies for multiple
choice? Should we drill them on memorizing the rules? What would this do for
them, in their lives as writers? What effect would this kind of teaching have
on their skills and motivation for real writing?

I have now been working for two years in a
school that is based on a big vision for every students' active participation
and positive contribution in the 21st century world. Measures on standardized
tests are inadequate to assess the internalized habits, dispositions, skills
and knowledge that we see our students developing: capacity for leadership,
creativity in overcoming constraints, active willingness to help others, issue
analysis using multiple perspectives, belief in their own responsibility and
agency, ability to build a case or analyze another's argument. It is not easy
or simple, nor could it be standardized to hold teachers and students who were
not committed to this particular vision "accountable."

But I have seen students challenged and
inspired to work hard, investigate, create, strive for greatness in all
subjects--and still not consistently score well on a test.  I feel a very deep responsibility for these
children’s growth and well-being. After ten years of accepting accountability
for test scores, with increasingly narrowed results for kids, I now feel passionate
about communicating the truth of what it means for our students’ future
prospects if we continue to rely on standardized tests as the measure and
definition of success. We need to learn from our experiences with the limits of
standardized tests. We must develop strong alternatives for gathering evidence
of progress, aligned with a clear vision of who our students will become, what
they need to know and be able to do as a result of their years in school. 

 As an educator with a background in
qualitative assessment, it breaks my heart to see children’s
abilities and
potential reduced to test scores, their days in schools reduced to test
preparation, teaching reduced to scripted lessons and canned curricula. The
truth about data? I'm frustrated, and it's not because I do not believe in
accountability, rigor or quality teaching-- but precisely because I do.

Image: TEST/Sidelong/Creative Commons