Get Schooled

By Tony

November 9, 2007 6:09 PM | Link to this

The only ones who win by adding more tests are the testing companies. The new list of tests you have given, based on current pass rates of EOCTs, will lower the graduation rate. I don’t know how long it will take for our politicians to understand, but more testing will not improve student learning.

It is time to talk about the harmful effects of the testing craze. Students who would currently pass the tests with ease will be subjected to the same boring, rote-style courses as all students to guarantee they will be ready for the test. This will frustrate upper ability students.

Lower ability students will be subjected to repeat courses and extended time to prepare for the test. This will take resources away from everyone else.

Middle students will lose, too. They will have choices taken away from them. Everyone must have the same coursework so that life is fair.

The cycle will continue ad nauseum.

Graduation rates and quality of student learning is determined more by community values than dictates of government. When a community demands excellence from their schools, they will get it. When parents teach their children that a good education takes hard work, then students will put forth the effort.

By SET

November 9, 2007 6:34 PM | Link to this

This is an interesting problem. In general I approve of graduation/diploma testing because I believe it adds value to the diploma - which is currently not a guarantee that the graduate can write a letter, speak english, have basic literacy, math, history logic skills etc.

But I’m also thinking about the left side of the bell curve which includes most blacks. It takes very little tinkering to produce huge racial disparities in pass rates. At some point we do not want to block from graduation people who you would expect to function in society at an acceptable minimum level.

The trick is to find a level of literacy or whatever that we can agree is the lowest common denominator. In CA the State Exam Pass level is 8th grade reading level by 12th grade and that is causing a lot of Boo Hooing and hand wringing by the losers. We don’t want to go lower but the original 10th grade level (proposed) score was run through the computer and determined to produce unacceptably high black failures. So 8th grade it is, and 8th grade it will stay.

Yes, higher standards will produce more failures and a lot of students will drop out in anticipation of failure. Now can we teach to the higher standards and keep the failure rate the same?

Politically Correct dogma holds that intelligence (and these tests indirectly measure that) is not innate but is a product of good teachers and curriculum (Nonsense, but accepted). That’s why the teachers are getting bashed.

I predict that if we raise the standards in any way the teachers will be punished when the results are more flunking. Or else there will have to be new levels of cheating to keep the pass rates at par.

Either way the teachers will lose if those pass levels are raised. Worse, teachers will just refuse to work with minority kids to avoid the hit on the NCLB sanctions.

Unless I’m wrong about the IQ thing. I could always be wrong. But betting against house odds isn’t a good long term policy.

I look forward to opposing comments. I didn’t create this mess, I only report on it. I think it’s important to keep public discourse going on the racial gap because it’s an important part of the dumb policy moves the educrats make.

By HS Teacher Too

November 9, 2007 7:48 PM | Link to this

First of all, Tony: As usual, you are 100% correct. It’s nice to see you on this blog and to read thoughtful your commentary every day.

But as to the topic at hand:

I support end-of-course tests as a means of standardizing across the state what is really taught in courses with the same title. Algebra 2 in School A as compared to Algebra 2 in School B can be compared based on class grades as related to EOCT grades. (In other words, is an A in County Q really that great if the kids tend to do worse on the EOCT? That kind of analysis.) In that sense, I don’t mind EOCTs, with certain caveats. I won’t get into that here, because that’s not the point of the question this evening.

However, as long as Georgia insists so adamantly and short-sightedly that it is moving to a one-diploma-level system, it won’t matter what or how many tests they give — the courses required for graduation will become, by necessity, so watered down that they will be meaningless. That, in turn, will mean that the end-of-course tests (and/or how they are graded) will be adjusted to accomodate for the watering-down phenomenon. In that regard, I don’t know that we will see any siginificant change in graduation rates one way or the other, because as soon as it becomes apparent that students are being prevented from graduating because the tests are not in line with what teachers are really able to do with a classroom 1/2 full with kids who don’t belong there, the tests and/or the entire system will be adjusted to “address the graduation rates crisis.”

So, no, I don’t really see the EOCTs as making any meaningful difference in either direction. It’s the same dog and pony show, really, just with different dogs and ponies.

Now all that being said, I have pointed to the NY model before and I will do it again today. What is wrong with saying that a college prep diploma has x-required courses, and of those, y-of them have EOCTs? Passing the EOCT should be mandatory to receive credit for the course; and passing all of the courses and EOCTs should be required for graduating with a college prep diploma. If you can’t follow that track, there is a technical or general track without the EOCT demands, but it is still a diploma and not a certificate of attendance.

Is that so outrageous? Or is Georgia just too good to follow another state’s successful lead?

By Lee

November 9, 2007 8:31 PM | Link to this

Another chicken or egg question…

Let us not forget why we have become burdened with all these standardized tests in the first place:

SCHOOLS WERE HANDING OUT DIPLOMAS TO ILLITERATES.

Or, another way to look at it is the state does not trust the various school systems to do their jobs.

If we are only going to test to an 8th (or is it 10th) grade level, let’s give them an incentive (or should I say; incentivize them). You pass the EOCT after your 8th (or 10th) grade, we’ll hand you a diploma and wish you the best. The remainder can stay in school to prepare for college.

There. Problem solved. Next…

By Lee

November 9, 2007 8:58 PM | Link to this

I hate it when I find the fatal flaw in an otherwise stellar plan…

We can’t let the dummies walk out the door after the 8th grade — it would decimate the football team.

Doh!!

By JustMe

November 9, 2007 9:35 PM | Link to this

This is no secret. The proposal to move away from the GHSGT to the EOCT has been in the works for a few years.

IMHO here is the problem… the EOCT is doesn’t stop those that haven’t learned a darn thing from graduating with a HS diploma. The EOCT only counts for a relatively small percentage of their grade in that class. Let me give an example….

John is a ‘student’ that doesn’t do any work and hasn’t learned a darn thing since 6th grade. But, somehow, John finds himself in high school. He takes a series of ‘teachers’ that have given up being real teachers and simply pass students. So, John has a B+ in a class of one of those ‘teachers’ and takes the EOCT. Of course, John fails the EOCT miserably, but ends up with a C in the course and passes any way.

So, John again slips through the cracks of the system and ends up with a high school diploma?

I say no. A high school diploma should represent some measure of knowledge and not a measure of marking time in a building. We should get rid of all EOCT and keep the GHSGT. If we were to add any thing it should be a MSGT (Middle School Graduation Test).

By Tony

November 9, 2007 10:18 PM | Link to this

SET has hit upon another important negative repercussion of the current testing craze: kids are now liabilities. Many teachers dream of “unlocking doors to the future” and other fanciful things about teaching kids. Now, if the kid is a potential red mark on the testing roster, he or she is like a hot potato. No one wants the child in his or her class.

I agree that EOCTs are a good way to strengthen the curriculum across our state. However, using these exams as exit/high stakes tests without giving thought to the consequences will be disastrous. The current HSGT serves the purpose of a minimum standards test. One big problem with it is that the science test still nit picks the curriculum for detail oriented questions.

One of the other issues about high school graduation is the “on time” graduation rate that is a hot political issue. Educators have been told for years that all children can learn but not at the same rate. Now, we want to make sure everyone graduates on time. This is about efficiency, not learning.

SET also makes many good points about IQ. Lower IQ students take more time to learn the necessary content. Higher IQ students do not take as long. They can breeze through the basics and move to the advanced. If on-time graduation rate is the goal, then dumbing down is the only way to achieve that goal. If true learning is the goal, then perhaps there needs to be another measure for a school’s success.

How do we solve the problem? I don’t have the perfect answer, but I don’t think EOCTs should become the gatekeepers.

By Jim D

November 10, 2007 6:29 AM | Link to this

Bridget,

I personally don’t see where it will make a bit of difference once way or the other.

At the HS level we are already spending 38 of our 180 days doing testing. Test prep takes up about 76 days of our 180 leaving only 66 days a year for any meaninful instruction to happen.

Politicans hit upon the only proven method of showing improvement years ago, “Lowering the Bar”. Swapping one test for another won’t get the job done unless in the process the bar is lowered even further. (& it will be)

The thing is that with a new test or even a revamped one being used as a measure We must start collecting data all over—there is no comparison that can be made between old data and new. This allows politicans to claim great strides in improvement without actually having to make any gains, or provide real support of improvement claims.

So look for new testing mathods, new tests, and useages of them every few years in the name of improving education while all the while slipping down hill.

By Jim D

November 10, 2007 6:34 AM | Link to this

Excvuse me Tony,

The solution is simple.

Stop all this meaningless time consuming testing and allow teachers to use the class time to teach rather than doing test prep.

By Jim D

November 10, 2007 6:49 AM | Link to this

Here’s a few dates pulled from Gwinnett’s largest schools web site.

Test Dates for the GHSGT:

September 26, 2007 Writing Test

March 31, 2008 Language Arts

April 1, 2008 Math

April 2, 2008 Science

April 3, 2008 Social Studies

April 4, 2008 Make up for absent students

Main Administration Dates for GATEWAY (SOPHOMORES)

April 22, 2008 Social studies/Language Arts (Make-Up for absent students is April 23, 2008)

April 24, 2008 Science/Language Arts (Make-Up for absent students is April 25, 2008)

Retest Dates for GATEWAY (For students who have not passed, and for new juniors and new seniors- new to GWINNETT)

October 23, 2008 Social Studies/Language Arts

October 25, 2008 Science/Language Arts

February 23, 2008 (Saturday) Social Studies 8:00AM, Science 12:00PM

The PSAT will be given at Mill Creek High School on October 17, 2007. All Sophomores will be taking the PSAT free of charge. Any Junior wishing to take the PSAT must register for it through the testing office. Forms will be given out through ACT (Academic Contact Time) at the beginning of September.

Any Junior not participating in the PSAT will be participating in a review of GHSGT in one of our computer labs using the USA test prep program. Freshmen will be involved with practice Gateway as well as visits from the counselors providing information about their four year academic plan. The Seniors will have activities planned with the Balfour representatives as well as information regarding colleges. All students are expected to be in attendance at school.

For SAT information and registration, please visit www.collegeboard.com

For ACT information and registration, please visit www.act.org

EOCT tests are administered as main administrations in December and May. However, every month (usually about the third week) a “mid-month” test will be administered on-line for students on an as needed basis.

DECEMBER 2007 - EOCT in Economics only

MAY 2008 - EOCTs will be administered in the following:

9th and 11th Literature

Algebra I (includes Concepts of Algebra)

Geometry (includes Informal Geometry)

Biology

U.S. History

Economics

Testing dates at Mill Creek High School will be announced once they are set by the state. The schedule is as follows. For all content areas, students will take section 1 of the exam on day one and section 2 of the exam on day two. Testing will take place with the regular classroom teacher during the daily class period in a computer lab.

TBA 9th Language Arts and Geometry

TBA Biology* and Algebra

TBA Make-up Testing*

TBA Economics and 11th Language Arts

TBA U.S. History and Physical Science

TBA Make-up Testing

By Tony

November 10, 2007 10:10 AM | Link to this

Oh Jim D you are so right about the amount of testing!!!! Even in the elementary level we give up the equivalent of 9 days for testing. Then the tests are spread out of so many days that we actually lose more time. My first post on this topic did not state my opinion clearly enough. I agree that we should end all the meaningless testing and let teachers teach.

By SET

November 10, 2007 12:12 PM | Link to this

It would be far preferable to centralize the proficiency test taking to statewide exams in auditoriums so that the testing is taken away from the schools en toto. Set them for Saturdays (or multi-day exams).

The testing should be handled much as the PSAT and SAT is. Less temptation for the individual schools to cook the scores for their kids. Citywide exams and the scores on the internet in a week or so (for the multi-choice anyway, essays take longer).

Dosen’t a nationwide student exam system exist in the UK? National exams?

The school time should be spent in school programs. Testing should be more of a municipal mass exam thing. Kind of like getting the driver’s license. Thumbprint, Photo ID, assigned seating, register online, etc. It would be cheaper than having the schools play the testing game also.

On point, I think the graduation exam requirements should only be a minimum literacy and knowledge level that should be required to be considered a full member of society. Frankly if one can’t pass that I don’t think they should be voting, serving on juries, or reproducing either but that is a whole other issue. The pass level should NOT be set terribly high, maybe a working IQ level of 90.

I suspect that is what CA has done with the 8th grade literacy standard we use. I don’t think we will decide to change it. If one can’t - even with help - reach that level, one is too childlike to be taken as a functioning adult. Thus the phrase “Eternal Children”.

By SET

November 10, 2007 12:24 PM | Link to this

JustMe is absolutely right about a Middle School graduation test. It’s urgently needed. Those in trouble intellectually at that point need to be labeled and put in special campuses until and unless they can be brought up to minimum level for High School. Throwing them into High School mainstream forces them to work the only thing they are really good at. Violence and Sulking, Football and Sex. They’d be more productive to society being taught what they can absorb and placed into Voc Ed at 14. By the time they were 19 they would be able to support themselves, their wife/husband and children.

Upper Middle Class Society prolongs adolescence because of the need for years of training. Thus deferred marriage and childbirth.

The Proletariat become sexually active, pair bond and reproduce very early, like 14 if you let them. That applies to Prole Boys and Prole Girls. It is important to teach the Proles how to make a living in the economy (legally) and you have to do that at puberty. Because if you don’t, they will find occupations on their own (because they need them) such as prostitution, drug dealing, and acquisition and marketing of stolen goods and contraband.

Our white liberals though just giving them welfare would handle the problems. Well, the Proles need work too just like everyone else. We are responsible for the integration of Proletariat youth into society and we should do so openly, not pretend they are just like you and me and should get a career after college.

By SET

November 10, 2007 12:41 PM | Link to this

Typo, Last paragraph, “…thought just giving them welfare…” Sorry!

By Tony

November 10, 2007 12:59 PM | Link to this

SET, again you have pointed to a couple of ideas that are very important. Perhaps the best, most attractive target for adolescents in Georgia would be eligibility for driver licenses. The state could merge the basic literacy requirement with the drivers requirement and remove the testing program from the schools’ responsibilities. This would target the approximate age range you indicate. We currently have school attendance requirements in order to be eligible for driver licenses, but the state allows for waivers. The waivers, in effect, cancel the school attendance requirements.

I’m afraid that here in the Deep South, a voting eligibility requirement would never make it through the US Justice Department. All of our election rules, districting, basically everything regarding elections must clear that department.

Your second idea that intrigued me was the removal of testing from the schools. This idea has some merit, but could not feasibly be applied to our current mandated testing menu. I don’t think the need for this is because schools “cook” the results, but the time for testing takes away from teaching time.

By Lee

November 10, 2007 2:05 PM | Link to this

“John is a ‘student’ that doesn’t do any work and hasn’t learned a darn thing since 6th grade. But, somehow, John finds himself in high school. He takes a series of ‘teachers’ that have given up being real teachers and simply pass students. So, John has a B+ in a class of one of those ‘teachers’ and takes the EOCT. Of course, John fails the EOCT miserably, but ends up with a C in the course and passes any way.”

But, according to Justme’s usual rants, it is the PARENT that is most at fault for the failure of schools. Dont-ya-just-hate-it when you paint yourself in a corner??

Refer back to my original post. One of the main reasons we have all these tests is that the schools stopped doing their job and started handing out diplomas to illiterates.

In industry, we call it “root cause analysis.” Ie, are you working on the problem or the symptom of the problem.

All this testing is merely addressing the symptom.

By HS Teacher Too

November 10, 2007 2:07 PM | Link to this

Jim d, although I appreciate your posting, be aware that not all of the testing days involve taking instruction time from the regular schedule. For example, the make-up days involve only those students that missed the exams, while the bell schedule, etc., go on as normal. I taught at one of the other large schools in Gwinnett (wait; that would be any other school in Gwinnett …) and NO ONE cared that we lost literally 20 school days to testing. That’s a MONTH OF SCHOOL. Factor in the fact that the EOCT is given almost a month BEFORE the year ends, and in an EOCT, “high-stakes-test” course, we lost two months of potential teaching time. Add it to the list of how the system is not working …

Yep, makes a ton of sense.

JustMe, The example you gave of the student who fails the EOCT miserably but still gets a C in the course is exactly why I said that passing the EOCT should be a requirement for passing the course. I agree with you 100%: the system in place now effectively defeats the purpose of having an EOCT at all if we don’t attach any consequence to it.

And SET — here in metro Atlanta (or at least in Gwinnett County), ALL freshmen, sophomores and juniors at our high schools take the PSAT. So here, the PSAT is not a sign-up-if-you-like Saturday test as it is in other places. The testing day involves the entire high school and typically seniors are given some alternative activity. However, our AP exams are given at a central location as you described.

Folks, this may be an unpopular view on this blog, but I support EOCTS when they are done right. The trouble is that I don’t believe that we’ll ever be able to implement them appropriately in Georgia.

(Cynicism temporarily over. It’s Saturday!)

By SET

November 10, 2007 2:08 PM | Link to this

Tony: I despise the federal interference in the states including voting requirements. But that’s another topic.

I am not saying the state and school administrations are in the business of deciding who votes directly, but they are in the business of deciding who is good enough to participate in civic life through driver’s licenses, car registration and occupational licenses. The states can set the lowest common denominators and in so doing draw several lines across the classes of citizens (actually residents) so that people understand what society requires of them.

We also do that with criminal law. things that are felonies in the South are Misdemeanors in CA and vice versa. We tag undesirable people with our criminal laws and our sex registration laws to run them down in society and out of the state, and keep undesirables from moving in.

For example in CA, Home Base of Hollywood, the crime of Stalking can carry lifetime registeration as a sex criminal. And to commit that one you need never actually locate or confront your target. The defendants really don’t like that and really don’t know that law since we carefully refuse to teach criminal law to anybody in public school.

That way the proletariat can get in a lifetime of trouble in a single alcohol fueled night without “doing anything” as they like to say.

The professional class children just seem to know better. At least a voice inside tells them not to pose for pictures having public sex with a child, like that fool in GA.

By flipper

November 10, 2007 5:35 PM | Link to this

So, what comes of gifted and high achieving kids in all this mess? Do they actually now take the same courses as SET’s “proletariat.” Are they all now on the same track…? Pretty soon, everyone will be eligible for an MD at this rate. They will just dumb down the standards and get rid of the residency requirement.

So, is it time to pull my kids?

By Tony

November 10, 2007 6:35 PM | Link to this

flipper, I stated what I believe will happen to gifted and high achieving students as an unintended consequence to this misguided proposal.

Rather than pulling your kids, become vocal about your expectations. Let the state and local boards of education know your concerns and don’t accept the pat answer, “This step will raise expectations for all students.”

These proposals for more testing are from politicians, not educators. So, stay in touch with your local schools.

By JustMe

November 10, 2007 11:31 PM | Link to this

Tony,

I do rant about uninvolved parents, but I also rant about stupid education administration BS (like testing). Me thinks you selectively read (or remember) my posts.

WRT parents, it is the parents that protest when their child fails the CRCT and doesn’t want them to be held back. It is their threats of a law suit that makes the administrators quickly make exceptions to those failures and pass them on any way to the next grade. And, it is the teachers in the following grades that have to deal with the repercussions.

By jim d

November 11, 2007 4:57 AM | Link to this

Deweyan educational practices, rather than testing to improve education!

Need I say more?

By Lisa B.

November 11, 2007 11:22 AM | Link to this

To get out of middle school, students are “required” to pass the CRCT in math and reading. That could have worked a the middle school “exit exam.” However, there are simply too many kids who never pass the test, keep getting taller, more disruptive, etc, until the middle schools “place” them in high school. Many of these students have IQ’s of 70-75. It’s crazy to try to educate everyone the same way!

I agree with SET’s statement that people are going to find work. They have to live. We need to work much harder to make sure students are trained so they can find LEGAL work.

Unfortunately, Lee is right. We did this to ourselves when we started handing out diplomas to illiterates. The U.S. lost faith in the public education system.

By newbie

November 11, 2007 6:34 PM | Link to this

Like Flipper, I debate pulling my kid. She is in accelerated and AP classes (even doing one AP on her own, because her school doesn’t offer it), and as far as I’m concerned, the EOCT is an unnecessary annoyance.

I think this move toward standardization is at the expense of high-performing students. They actually want to learn, and the preparation for standardized testing is interrupting that - they could be using that time for more discussions, more exploration, more research projects (how many of the winners of research contests and scholarships have been from Georgia lately?)

I agree that for EOCTs to be worthwhile, they should determine whether a student passes a course, but how about some way to exempt a student, or two levels of test - standard and “with distinction”? Either way, quit spending time coaching the students - if the course content is taught, the students should be able to pass the test - one day out of the semester devoted to the test, that’s all.

By Lisa B.

November 11, 2007 7:19 PM | Link to this

I too, agree that the move towards standardization harms the high kids. It also harms those with low ability. Some students just don’t have the mental ability to learn Algebra and Chemistry. Schools no longer teach those students survival skills and vocational training.

Now we’re told to “differientiate” our instruction and performance tasks so all students can learn. We must appeal to their individual learning styles and intervene with a “pyramid of intervention” to assist those who fail. All students must meet the same objectives, whether some fly, some drive, some walk, some crawl. I suppose some will be dragged along.

The real world of work will not “differentiate” to accomodate learning styles. No “pyramid of intervention” will be there. However, all the students must pass all the tests. Many public education bashers would be highly impressed at the incredible amount of work teachers do with the hope that ALL their students will succeed. I am constantly amazed teachers don’t exit the profession in higher numbers than those reported. However, the teachers I know, work with, and talk with, would never leave their students. I hope we don’t make it so hard that even those who dearly love this profession, finally give up as well.

By HS Teacher Too

November 11, 2007 8:59 PM | Link to this

I agree that for EOCTs to be worthwhile, they should determine whether a student passes a course, but how about some way to exempt a student, or two levels of test - standard and “with distinction”?

newbie, parents have often shared this concern with me: why do gifted kids and college prep kids take the same EOCT?

The answer is that even if the gifted kids take a gifted level course, the EOCT isn’t designed to show how deeply they dug into the material; it’s designed to show that they have attained the basic understanding of the important concepts. That being said, I would entirely support a grading scale that said students who earned above a certain threshold “passed with distinction.” But again, let’s make the cut-off meaningful. Saying that a student who gets an 80% passes with distinction devalues the idea. My take on it is that getting a 75-80 on an EOCT ought to be reasonably attainable if a student took and understood the course, so maybe earning a 95 or better would be passing with distinction? Or then again, why not just let the grades speak for themselves? Well, part of that problem is that the EOCTs are not presently graded on a scale that makes any flipping sense to outsiders! The tests need to be graded — or converted — to a percentage scale so that parents, other school systems, colleges, etc., can understand what the grades mean, and can somewhat reasonably compare scores from year to year.

By M

November 12, 2007 12:25 AM | Link to this

What do we do with a student that passes the EOCT and the HSGT but fails the class? The exam scores are pass plus and the like. They simply did not do the assignments. On topic now..Personally I like the EOCT as a judge of passisng the class or not. I do not care for busy work or the graduation test. I believe students struggle with certain portions for the simple fact the material was covered 2-3 years prior to them taking the test. The students are not remembering the facts for the long haul, they are simply retaining info long enough to make it out of the class. Then people act surprised and upset that 1 month of cramming did not help the student pass the test years later. I say be realistic. Stop playing the race card as a way to dumb down the test. It is insulting to my intelligence. When every school teaches every child properly, when you no longer have to go to the other side of the county to obtain a decent education, then and only then will GA have higher scores and graduation rates.

By jim d

November 12, 2007 4:55 AM | Link to this

I’m not surprised that many teachers support EOCT’s as a pass / fail test.

It get’s them off the hook!

By JustMe

November 12, 2007 7:58 AM | Link to this

jd -

Are you really completely insane? Why would a pass/fail test get teachers off of the hook? In what imaginary world that you live in is that a good thing for teachers?

Having a pass/fail test will only put more pressure on teachers to teach the material (read to the test) so that a high percentage of their classes will pass.

You are a trip…..

But I forgot your creed: it is always the teachers fault.

By JustMe

November 12, 2007 8:01 AM | Link to this

M-

What you say is already happening. There are a few students that pass all of their classes and cannot graduate because they cannot pass the GHSGT.

Is that a bad thing…. IMHO not necessarily so. A student can smile and be a teacher-pleaser, passing classes by the skin of their teeth without ever knowing the material. The GHSGT is to stop those types of students that just mark time in a building from getting a HS diploma. And, this means that a HS diploma actually means something more than that.

By Hick from the Sticks

November 12, 2007 8:03 AM | Link to this

I suppose I need more sleep. I’m agreeing with you again, Jim. :)

If more teachers support the EOCT as indicitive as a pass/fail test, the solution then, becomes painfully stagnant:

Teach the test. Do nothing but teach the test. From the first bell, to the last bell, teach the test.

When you are done with that, teach the test again.

Teach the test in your sleep.

While you are grocery shopping, stop the people who are bagging your grocieries and teach the test to them.

Teach the test to the people who have been out of high school for five years. Avoid getting mauled in the process.

Teach the test to people with false legs and real feet.

Teach the test to people who have no teeth and are getting fitted for braces.

After that is done, we will have a wonderous increase of passing children who shall venture out into the world and be more than capable of one thing:

Passing the test.

Yippee.

By Jeff

November 12, 2007 8:09 AM | Link to this

EOCTs:

One class I taught at Newton had an EOCT (Geometry). Two points on this:

1) As bad as many of you say I am, out of 5 Geometry teachers, ALL of whom had more experience than me (2 by more than a a decade and a half!!), my students scored the second highest in the school on the Geometry EOCT. Not bad for a guy who had precisely ZERO classroom experience coming into the test, eh?

2) With my classes, there were no surprises on the EOCT. The ones I thought would be able to handle it were, and the ones that I knew were struggling in the class struggled on the EOCT. (Inlcuding one girl who I had recommended by that point take the ‘normal’ Algebra 2, rather than advanced. Though she was a PERFECT student, she didn’t actually KNOW SQUAT! She had learned to master the role of student rather than mastering the knowledge of content, and to me, that is one of the saddest things that can ever happen.)

EOCT Commentary:

1) I would change the law so that if you fail the EOCT, you do not get credit for the class. Oh sure, it can go on record that you got an A in the class (in this scenario I’m not touching the 15% required grade of the EOCT). But you would NOT get credit for graduation. Colleges do - at least KSU did - a similar thing with D’s in major classes. If you get a D in a major class, you do not get credit for the class, even though you technically passed the class.

2) Put such an EOCT on any critical class. I would go with the following (and I don’t know what they are currently on other than geometry, so if I match would someone please tell me??):

Science: Biology, Physics Social Studies: US History, Government, Economics Math: Algebra 1, Geometry English: Comp 1, American Lit (Only American authors from Colonial period on, though many of these works also fit my definition of ‘Classic’, which follows, ‘Classic’ Lit (‘Classic’ being everything from Epic of Gilgamesh through anything written pre-20th century.)

By V for Vendetta

November 12, 2007 9:02 AM | Link to this

Yes, the amount of testing is out of control, ridiculous, and mostly meaningless in the grand scheme of things. A more European model — rigorous testing after 8th grade, and then separation into trade/technical fields and college-bound fields — would make far more sense. But since counties like Gwinnett are ELIMINATING technical classes and trade classes, I don’t see that happening any time soon.

Memo to Gwinnett: How’s that working out for you? Thought so.

Anyway, what I was saying is … . oh, sorry, I gotta go. I have to go administer another test. See you next month.

By WFC

November 12, 2007 9:09 AM | Link to this

EOCT is a much better idea than the GHGT but still have serious flaws, to wit:

By James

November 12, 2007 9:36 AM | Link to this

As a teacher, I hate the EOCT, mostly for the reasons already mentioned. The proposed pass/fail for EOCT I do not view as an ‘out’ for the teacher. While yes, some teachers will move towards teaching to the test, doing that will make our jobs very horrible, boring, and unprofessional. I seriously doubt I will remain in this profession if it comes to that.

Some schools and school systems would likely love the pass/fail EOCT because it makes it easier for them to manipulate the numbers (teaching to the test) to make it appear as though they are educating the students, when in reality they are not.

The HSGT is much preferred to me. It is given at the end of their high school career. It tests the most basic of topics/subjects that all high school graduates are expected to know.

By fed up

November 12, 2007 11:49 AM | Link to this

So, is there any way at all of ever hoping that gifted kids will one day in the far away future be rescued from all of this nonsense so that they can remove the shackles of intolerable tedium and actually reach their potential?

Why doesn’t Bill Gates and his crowd push for getting gifted kids out of this mess? If he cares so much about the future of this country … does he not realize that we are trashing the only resource that can keep us competitive?

Is the kid who has an IQ of 80 really capable of winning a Nobel Peace Prize one day? Shouldn’t we nurture the kids who are capable of such a thing? Or do we continue to just completely ignore them (or even treat them with contempt) in the interest of making sure that the very slowest in our society can go to some sorry excuse for a “college”? If everyone goes to college, who will be the plumbers, waitresses, launderers, factory workers, technicians, etc? Will we have folks with a below average IQ working as scientists, doctors and lawyers just because we have to be fair? Is that really a good idea for our country?

This whole thing is ridiculous, and the requirement that all kids pass all EOCTs just adds to the nonsense. I just hope that someone in the next generation figures it out before our country becomes a complete cesspool of mediocrity in the name of political correctness….

Why is it OK to track kids in Europe and the rest of the free world after 8th grade, but it is not OK here in the U.S? Why are we so stupid?????

By V for Vendetta

November 12, 2007 12:02 PM | Link to this

fed up -

Because ALL kids are special! Didn’t you know that? :-)

Of course I agree with you. Until we stop rewarding kids for a job not-screwed-up and start rewarding them for a job well done (remember that?), we will always have to take part in these asinine tests. We’re only in this mess because we are frowned upon for actually grading them with anything even resembling accountability and toughness.

If I were allowed to teach my kids the way I saw fit, there would be more of a bell curve to my classes grades. As it stands, I am “encouraged” to have all of my grades lean to the A/B side of the curve, and fail no one. That makes me sick.

Think about it, we live in a world where some school districts forbid their teachers to issue students a grade of zero — even if the student turns NOTHING in!

In fact, that sounds like a good topic for a blog Bridget — discussing grading policies and procedures. It would be interesting to see what the general public has to say about it, especially considering more and more schools (and school districts) are banning their teachers from issuing zeros. To me, that sums up all of the madness in a nutshell.

By Jeff

November 12, 2007 12:11 PM | Link to this

V:

At Randolph, the minimum grade is 60 - no matter what.

The WORST part about that?

As is my habit, I ignored the policy I thought assinine and gave what was earned - be it 0, 30, or 100.

A TEACHER was one of the biggest complainants I had!!!!

By JustMe

November 12, 2007 12:12 PM | Link to this

fed up -

I agree 100%. Thankfully in high school, MOST offer AP classes for those gifted kids. Until then, I am fearful for those kids, and it is a shame. If your local high school doesn’t offer AP classes, I would look into joint enrollment with a local college to challenge your gifted child.

I never understood why Bush and his NCLB thought they would ‘bring up’ the US to be more competitive by ‘bringing down’ the high achievers.

By JustMe

November 12, 2007 12:23 PM | Link to this

V-

There is a school in DeKalb County that actually has a day called ZAP. ZAP stands for Zeros Aren’t Permitted.

At the end of the semester on this day, any student can go to any teacher and request work to ‘make up’ a zero (or zeros).

At first glance, one thinks - how nice. But what has happened?

Well, students have caught on quickly. They do no work (and I mean no work at all) such that all of their grades are zeros. Then, on ZAP day, they descend on teachers for all of the work to replace those zeros. Of course, teachers cannot have that many assignments ready and of course teachers cannot grade all of those assignments in one day. So, the teachers have given up and simply give all ‘students’ an A.

Problem solved. No zeros. The students are happy, the parents are happy, the administration is happy, and the teachers are trapped.

Of course, that particular school never makes AYP….. I wonder why?

By JustMe

November 12, 2007 12:27 PM | Link to this

Oh, I forgot to mention, that high school with the ZAP day….

Two years ago, their valedictorian went to GA Tech on scholarship. He flunked out his freshman year.

I wonder why?

By JustMe

November 12, 2007 12:38 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

Although I completely disagree with the policy you mention, I do understand why another teacher would complain.

When an administration makes a stupid policy, everyone is expected to follow it. When one person does not, it makes the others look bad. Students and parents quickly compare teachers and classes. If one teacher doesn’t follow policy, this really does impact everyone - including the other teachers.

This is how teachers become ‘trapped’ by stupid administration policies.

By Jeff

November 12, 2007 2:00 PM | Link to this

JM:

That wasn’t the reason this teacher complained. Indeed, part of Randolph’s problem is much like the student I mentioned in my first post this morning: They’ve mastered the appearances side of things, but their kids still KNOW less than nothing.

No, the reason this parent complained is only made worse due to her occupation (she should have known better):

Her DAUGHTER was in my class and had several zeroes or other grades THAT SHE HAD EARNED that were below 60.

By HS Teacher Too

November 12, 2007 2:44 PM | Link to this

WFC, I agree with what you say and think I said it all in some way or another myself somewhere along the way. Here’s a question, though. You said AP kids shouldn’t have to take an EOCT. I can’t think of a situation where an AP course requires an EOCT, though. Are you throwing this out as a general rule, or have you really encountered this foolishness?

By jim d

November 12, 2007 3:56 PM | Link to this

JM,

Please tell me you don’t teach reading comp.

Nowhere did I blame teachers in my latest comment. What I said is that many might look at high stakes testing as a method freeing them of responsibility. And that comment could easily be true in as much as teachers interface and accountability to parents is limited. You can not be aaccused of just disliking a particular student and failing them.

By L.King

November 12, 2007 9:23 PM | Link to this

I like the EOCT better than the graduation test. But like one blogger mentioned, the test needs to be taken at the end of the year instead with 3 weeks left to go. The test gives an incentive for students to actually learn the material because they know that right after they learn the material their knowledge will be tested. Get rid of the Graduation test and welcome the EOCT.

By Lee

November 13, 2007 7:13 AM | Link to this

“He takes a series of ‘teachers’ that have given up being real teachers and simply pass students”

“the teachers have given up and simply give all ‘students’ an A.”

“we live in a world where some school districts forbid their teachers to issue students a grade of zero — even if the student turns NOTHING in!”

All of the above quotes are from teachers. Like I said earlier, there is a reason for all these tests. Schools began passing students from grade to grade and handing out diplomas to illiterates. The end result is that the general public really does not trust the public schools to do their jobs anymore.

By jim d

November 13, 2007 8:35 AM | Link to this

Lee,

Trust?

Great topic for a guest blog.

You may consider writing one on this topic. Course, you’d po a few on this blog with such a topic, but hey—-what great fun.

By gary furman

November 13, 2007 12:54 PM | Link to this

I am a high school sciene/math teacher. High School graduation tests have been given to ensure a basic academic functionality in society. The science test is currently not written at that level, which has created a lot of embarrassing paranoias at school because so many kids flunk. The EOCTs were proposed because they have the advantage of being taken immediately after the class is taken, so the information is fresh. Also, the EOCT questions are more difficult. The HSGT makes some kids wait two years, which is why the science test is so dificult to pass. The sticky point with EOCTs is: what is the “passing” cutoff score? If a kid gets a 69 and the pass score is 70, the parents go ballistic if the kid has to take the course again. The the school board starts to sweat. Which means the principal starts to sweat. The REAL solutions were proposed by other bloggers: 1. Do NOT allow the middle school kids who fail CRCT to go on to regular high school and 2. have 2 high school curricula- one traditional academic and the other a job-preparing tech track with very little traditional academic classes. A large percentage of kids are just not academically inclined, but twe need to maximize their existing talents, and the best way to do that is with a lot of votech choices. If these kids are happier, they stand a better chance of contributing to society, rather that being behavior problems in high school, dropring out, and then beoming criminals or poverty cases.

By Lisa B.

November 13, 2007 8:03 PM | Link to this

Gary, I completely agree with your post. I think we have lost sight of what is best for students. We don’t need to cram all kids into the same one-size-fits-all box.