ABCNews tackles the subject of exit exams, but while it appears the reporter may have tried to balance out the article, he didn't adequately research the topic, and most of the space is given over to testing critics:
[Teacher] Orlinsky's concern has become an issue nationwide, as more and more states move toward requiring that every student pass a standard statewide test on top of their regular class requirements in order to graduate.
The shift toward more standardized testing is seen not only in exit exams, the tests — currently given in 19 states — that high school students must pass in order to graduate, but also in the requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act, which judges schools on the basis of annual statewide test scores.
Critics of the move say that there is already evidence that children — particularly minority and poor children — are dropping out or being pushed out of schools as a result of emphasis on high-stakes testing.
The Amrein and Berliner study is quoted as "proof" that exit exams seem unrelated to actual academic achievement, or may actually impede learning - but the subsequent criticisms of the study (and one of the author's own waffling quotes) that appeared in the very recent Center on Education Policy paper on exit exams are not mentioned in the ABCNews article. Accidental oversight? Or does ABCNews want to leave readers in the dark about research showing that exit exams may indeed have a positive impact on other measures of academic achievement, a point which David Berliner himself has conceded?
The final sections of the article cover the topic of dropouts and alternative assessments, and here the reporter's lack of research and knowledge about the topics are apparent:
...research seemed to confirm what critics have said about increased rates of dropouts and so-called "push-outs," cases when poor-performing students are allegedly either counseled to leave school, ostensibly to focus on taking high school equivalency tests, or are intentionally discouraged by being repeatedly failed in the years before they would be required to take assessment tests.
"It looks like these exams may be causing dropouts, and this is really serious, because dropouts have a much harder time throughout their lifetime," Gayler said.
A few sentences later, a researcher is quoted who does note that the research linking exit exams to dropout rates is inconclusive, but it's telling that the reporter is willing to give credence to the theory than an increased dropout rate is a valid criticism of the exam, and not of the schools that are responsible for failing to educate their students. If schools raise standards in any fashion, via graduation requirements, exams, or other options, and more students drop out in response, I fail to see why critics then rush to judge the standards. Can't this also be seen as evidence that the schools are merely failing to meet their own standards?
Finally, the mantra of "holistic assessments" is once again invoked without any concern for the cost and psychometric complexity involved with these types of assessments:
There is strong evidence, though, that different people test differently, critics of the reliance on tests say, and they while the tests might be good tools for certain kinds of assessment, they are not always the best way to judge how much a student has learned...
"Typically grades do correlate to test scores, but they don't correlate perfectly," Sacks said...
Groups like the Massachusetts Coalition for Authentic Reform in Education, an organization of teachers and parents, say that a holistic approach would be a better way to assess whether a student is achieving academic goals.
Rather than putting all students through standardized tests, "richer, more complex types of assessment" such as student portfolios, classroom-based tests and teacher assessments would give a "much more fair and accurate" picture of what a student has learned, said MassCARE statewide coordinator Jackie King.
Does Ms. King have any idea how much it costs to develop and pilot tests assessments? Is she aware of the amount of bias that is introduced by such assessments? Are those who are are concerned about correlations aware that the lower the reliability of the instrument, the lower the correlation it will have with any other assessment - and performance assessments nearly always have lower reliability than multiple-choice assessments?
Student portfolios are expensive to develop, expensive to grade, and introduce the potential for a fantastic amount of rater bias. I've written about this multiple times (see here and here), and yet I've almost never seen a reporter inform readers about the fact that these politically-correct, touchy-feely exam alternatives come equipped with massive drawbacks and pitfalls as part of their standard operating system. This may explain the incorrect-yet-seemingly-widespread view that performance assessments are easier to develop and score - and are by definition more "fair" - than the oft-vilified objective assessments.
Posted by kswygert at September 9, 2003 11:39 AM