July 14, 2003
Caring for kittens
Joanne Jacobs recently discovered a nifty post by Canadian blogger Colby Cosh, who in turn has discovered a recent survey of Ontario's teachers. The teachers favor, by a 2-to-1 margin, teacher evaluations instead of standardized tests. First note the smug description of the findings by the president of the CTF:
"Only 28 per cent of respondents support standardized tests," said Doug Willard, President of the Canadian Teachers' Federation (CTF)..."This speaks to the public's growing uneasiness and concern around standardized testing...
"Standardized tests can't measure initiative, creativity, imagination, conceptual thinking, curiosity, effort, irony, judgment, commitment, nuance, good will, ethical reflection, or a host of other valuable attributes.
"However, what they can measure and count are isolated skills, specific facts and functions -- the least interesting and least significant aspects of learning," explained Willard. "These high stakes tests serve to sort and rank students rather than support student learning."
As Colby so rightly notes:
Let the record show it: the national labour apparatus of Canada's schoolteachers regards skills like reasoning, mathematics, reading, and history as "the least interesting and least significant aspects of learning." You must have suspected this already if you've tried to have correct change made in a shop lately. Actually, I think it's rather courageous of Doug Willard to admit that standardized testing absolutely can measure student mastery of basic skills. That is, after all, just what those tests are meant to establish. Would you criticize a tailor because his measurement of your inseam failed to capture your ability to shoot free throws?
Good point. All you testing critics out there who claim that standardized tests don't actually measure anything - Doug Willard begs to differ. Of course, he has zero respect for what the tests do measure, but it's amusing to see testing critics switch between the contradictory viewpoints of "the tests don't measure anything" to "well, the tests do measure these skills, but we don't care about these skills" whenever the mood strikes them. This waffling is similar that that seen in the FCAT boycotters in Florida, who one minute claim the SAT is racially biased, and the next minute suggest the SAT as a valid alternative test to the "racially-biased" FCAT.
Joanne's comment on this survey:
It's true, as the teachers' union leader says, that tests don't measure creativity, initiative, love of kittens, etc. But schools have a responsibility to teach reading and math, and neither the responsibility nor the competence to teach creativity, initiative, love of kittens, etc.
Much as it pains me to say so, Joanne is wrong (there's a first time for everything). If one visits the Canadian Teacher's Federation website, one discovers the following beliefs prominently displayed:
We, Teachers of Canada, Believe:
* in a system of education rooted in the principles of equity, universality and accountability...
* that the goals society sets for students and schools must be challenging but attainable, and that progress towards these goals must be measured thoroughly and fairly.
* that the school curriculum must be designed to prepare students to become caring and responsible members of society.
Note that this list, though it does include accountability, does not state that the Canadian teachers believe that children should be educated to be well-informed about literature, or history, or science. Nowhere in this list are any beliefs related to the importance of literacy or numeracy. Nay, students should instead be "caring and responsible," and I do believe that love of kittens falls under "caring" in this respect. What's more, the Canadian teachers are all about goals and accountability; they just don't happen to mention what they should be held accountable for.
Shame on us psychometricians, with our insistence on measuring those "least interesting and least significant aspects of learning" such as math and reading, when the CTF has so explicitly stated that love of kittens is what children should learn. Why, if we'd have just listened, we'd have understood that what they want are tests designed to measure "good will" and "ethical reflection," though, if the kids haven't learned to read, designing a test with items that are comprehensible to them will be a trick.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I've got to go design a subjective, performance-based, oral exam on the proper method of petting a kitten so as to induce purring behavior. The CTF is waiting.
And yes, I am felinocentric. Want to make something of it?
Update: The posting above was modified on 7/22/03 to take into account some valid criticisms that were made in the comments section.