---

 Volume 29, Number 6

'Why I like test scores and what they tell me about curriculum'

Edward Kifer

From students in 'Program Evaluation' at Nipissing University, Ontario, Canada

 This paper was one of our readings at our Nipissing University Master of Education course 'Program Evaluation'. The class would like to respond from an Ontario perspective:

I agree with Kifer on a lot of his points which indicate his dislike of standardized testing and cross-international comparison of mathematics test scores. His ideas that environment, individual learning capabilities, the discrepancies amongst teaching methods and information coverage, support his opposition to standardized testing. This suggests that comparisons of students against a 'norm', as opposed to individual achievement, in regards to what was actually taught in a given classroom, is unfair and inadequate.

His data demonstrates the inadequacy of standardized tests to consider students 'tracking' abilities who do well, but not fair so well on their placement test. Tina

Kifer says, 'US education critics use highly aggregated test data to bash schools, teachers, or students and do not spend so much time talking about curriculum'. I would agree with Kifer, but would extend that comment to Canadian critics, Canadian media, Canadian politicians. I also would extend that to not just spending more time talking about Curriculum - but rather the DELIVERY of that curriculum. You can write as extensive and cohesive curricula you want, but until you give teachers TIME to assimilate it, TIME to work with it, TIME to modify their current teaching methods and TIME to develop and learn new strategies to teach it - you can not FAIRLY use test scores to compare and rate out education system.

I agree with Kifer where he states, 'students in various countries should be exposed to similar curricula if one is to rank order their performance in anything resembling a fair way.' What the Ontario government has done well (if there is anything to celebrate) is the creation of curriculum-based week long standardized tests, whereby all teachers use the same curriculum, the same time frame, the same teaching strategies and then all administer the same test based on what they have taught. In this way we are at least attempting to put everyone on an equal level related to curriculum and attempting to TEST the understanding of the material. I believe teachers learned a great deal about their teaching through this experience. I do agree that publishing such results can be damaging to many people.

Are we really doing all students a service by placing them all in one big heterogeneous group and attempting to successfully teach the curriculum?

Liesel

This article relied on graphics that were so scattered and unusual, it did not clarify for me. It was humour in how extreme we can go with research.

Linda

Who wants 'newly introduced content'? Just a three week curriculum should be linked to the rest of the curriculum.<

Bernie

I am not teaching to standards, I teach children and I like the process. How they get there - who cares. Process not product is the most important thing.

Stephanie

NCTM and NAEP testing have resulted in standards and more curriculum development. Improvement will show because of all the new texts, materials, and activities.

Ann

I was frustrated at the start of the article with the sentence, 'When I told them the journal did not matter, what counted was that a recent issue quoted Groucho Marx' . . I did not know the quote. The sentence continued that 'they understood immediately', and I felt I need this piece of information so that I also could understand.

Joanne

Thanks for being a forum for our responses. SR