Marcus A. Winters explained that there is no correlation between certification and teacher effectiveness at a recent Manhattan Institute for Policy Research event held to announce the publication of his new book, “Teachers Matter.” Winters went on to propose the idea of removing the barriers to becoming a teacher, suggesting that since there is no correlation between certification and teacher effectiveness, anyone with a college degree should be given the opportunity to teach if they are able to find someone to hire them. The fact is that many of us who went through teacher preparation and certification programs know they were not very helpful when it comes to the realities of the classroom. It is no surprise then that such certification has little impact on student success.
I think Winter’s idea deserves some attention, particularly in the case of secondary studies, but I wonder why he believes that a college degree should be required. If you are an expert in your field, chances are you may have reached this success without such a degree. Especially, if we consider experts who may be interested in taking up teaching upon retirement from their career. Academic inflation is only a recent phenomenon. Historically the majority of careers i.e. business, programming, entertainment casting or directing, writing, advertising, photography, art, etc. did not require such certification for success.
This was also published in the Huffington Post. You can check it out there along with the several dozen readers comments here.
Around the nation more and more school districts like New York City are considering making teacher performance ratings public. One of the many problems with this, simply put, is that the state tests which these tests are based on, well...they suck. Yep. I said it. My background is in K - 8 as a literacy and technology as a former literacy coach, tech coach, library media specialist, and current innovation manager who spent many days grading these subpar assessments. Because of my background and experience, I’m going to focus on the high stakes standard literacy tests K - 8 and explain why they suck.
Background In Reading Assessment
Students read at different levels. Each level has attributes associated with it and there are strategies that learners can take to move to the next level. Teachers assess student reading levels with something called a running record. Today with technology, these readings can even be recorded, so if necessary, the student’s actual running record or reading assessment could be shared. Teachers generally assess student reading at the beginning, middle and end of the year and can easily measure the growth of a student say from a G-Level reader to a J-Level reader. This makes sense as a measurement of student learning. It also allows for students to independently take ownership of their reading level and it is very easy to get families involved in strategies to support students.
The Problem with State Reading Tests
State reading tests provide all students on a grade level with the same test. While the test is an accurate measure of the students who fit the reading level the state arbitrarily has chosen, most students are left behind either because the reading level is too advanced or too easy. In essence the tests assess how well students are doing on something they can’t read well yet...Answer: Not very well. OR...we assess them on something that is below their reading level...So we don’t know growth, we only know they can read that well.
In another words, we’re not really assessing student reading level.
What we do know is that developmentally children become ready to read at different ages (click this link to hear John Taylor Gatto's thoughts on this). We also know that forcing reading on children is actually a deterrent for attaining growth. Finally, we know two extremely important factors in the attainment of reading fluency is family involvement and socio economic class.
None of these factors are in the control of the teacher!
What I propose is that we stop creating a test that makes teachers and students absolutely bonkers, and instead use the running record reading assessments that teachers already use to measure student reading level. Though, while this solves this issue of assessing reading more accurately, it doesn’t take into account that the factors that accelerate reading, really have nothing to do with the teacher.
On to writing...
As shared in Four Reasons Innovative Educators Should Boycott Standardized Tests, the problem with the way writing is assessed in standardized tests stems from the fact they use an outdated and irrelevant method of assessment. If teachers are doing their jobs effectively, students aren’t just focusing on hand it in teaching. Instead they are focused on “publish it” learning, meaning students are communicating authentically to real audiences using the learning style that best matches their strengths. Student work can ideally be kept in a portfolio that can be assessed for writing achievement.
Wouldn’t you want to measure a teacher by how she helps her students publish for authentic audiences in area of deep personal passion rather than how she helps a student write about a topic the state dictates?
The problem with the current method is this.
- We are not measuring what is important. The student’s ability to authentically communicate about topics of importance to them.
- We are valuing writing as the most important method of communication. While this method works well for some, others may excel at communicating through video, cartoon, animation, audio casts etc. etc. We are losing focus of what is important.
- Studies show that students empowered to use technology for communicating will demonstrate improvement however, their scores on writing the old fashioned way with pen and paper will decrease. Sadly, I’ve seen teachers refuse to let students use their own technology because they didn’t want their test scores to decrease. YIKES!!!
Not only is all of this bad enough, but these are high stakes tests for students too, meaning, if they don’t pass, they don’t move on to the next grade level doomed to sit through the same stuff that didn’t help them learn before and putting them in a category that diminishes their chances of success in the future.
This should give just a little insight into why these “teacher assessment” are really not the right way to go. If you’re convinced, you might be thinking, okay, that sounds nice, but there’s nothing we can do. The state makes us take these tests.
There is a movement bubbling up called The Bartleby Project started by John Taylor Gatto which you can read about here. It’s a call to action for students to simply write across the top of their test, “I prefer not to take your test.” The premise being that students and parents should be empowered to decided how their child should best be assessed and not forced by the state to be subjected to very questionable assessments.
The project has a growing following with a Bartleby Project Facebook Page, a number of reprints of John Taylor Gatto’s Bartleby Project proposal from his new book,Weapons of Mass Instruction floating around the web, and a huge round up of videos on You Tube. I’ve included two X-tranormal creations below.
One is a short video from a child’s perspective and the other is taking from John Taylor Gatto’s proposal for those who prefer watching to listening.
As I entered the 21st century, I read a research study in the TC Record that always stuck in my mind. It was called, “Effects of Computer Versus Paper Administration of a State-Mandated Writing Assessment.” You can read the results of the study here. This is a summary of what the study concludes: Like the previous studies, this article reports that open-ended Language Arts items that require students to generate responses using paper and pencil severely underestimate the achievement of students accustomed to writing using a computer. Combining the effects found in this study with those found in a prior study, this article estimates that students accustomed to writing using a computer under-perform on the standardized Language Arts test by four to eight points on an eighty point scale. This article concludes by recommending that state testing programs that employ open-ended items in Language Arts provide students with the option of composing responses on paper or on computer.
More than a decade has gone by, and guess what? We’re still using outdated paper and pencil assessments to assess students. Innovative educators should be mad as hell and I don’t think we should take it anymore. Four Reasons to Boycott Standardized Tests:- Inaccurate conclusions of the effectiveness of innovative educators.
In New York City they want to release teacher performance results which are based in large part on the outdated standardized tests their students are required to take. Passionate, innovative educators who are using 21st century technologies with their students will be penalized because they’re students have developed a modern writing process which can not be evaluated using outdated assessments. - A double-edged sword when assessing success of technology grants
As a grant manager I am required to show students progress on outdated standardized tests. I want the grant funding, so I am required to say they will show improvement, but I know the facts. Outdated assessments can’t measure the 21st century skills my students are developing and the reality is that using 21st century skills will actually result in a decrease in test scores even though my students are better writers and writing for an authentic audience. - Outdated assessments are driving outdated instruction
I was the PD manager for a 1:1 deployment of 24 schools. In some of the schools I went to students were not allowed to use laptops for writing or math because the students were taking a traditional tests and the schools did not want to risk getting shut down as a result of students using modern tools. They knew instinctively that when a student becomes accustomed to working with technology their thinking and creative processes change. This is shameful that today’s outdated assessments are holding our students in the past, and forcing innovative educators to carry out this edict. - Unnecessary duplication of efforts.
During my visits to tech-rich schools I often see students working with both paper/pencil and technology. Thousands of trees are killed and hours are wasted because educators want to ensure that students will be able to do well on the outdated tests. This requires students to do work on the computer, but also with paper/pencil so they can perform well on the tests that are stuck in the past.
Testing companies are making millions on the backs of our students and teachers. They are not updating assessments because it is not cost-effective for them. Making a profit, not ensuring our kids profit from their education is what drives these companies. Innovative educators know the truth. This is wrong and we can mobilize and connect like no other. Here in NY the tests are several months away. Do we have the courage and power to boycott the tests and really start preparing students for the world in which they live? I hope so.
Marcus A. Winters explained that there is no correlation between certification and teacher effectiveness at a recent Manhattan Institute for Policy Research event held to announce the publication of his new book, “Teachers Matter.” Winters went on to propose the idea of removing the barriers to becoming a teacher, suggesting that since there is no correlation between certification and teacher effectiveness, anyone with a college degree should be given the opportunity to teach if they are able to find someone to hire them. The fact is that many of us who went through teacher preparation and certification programs know they were not very helpful when it comes to the realities of the classroom. It is no surprise then that such certification has little impact on student success.
