Article Critique 7-3
Testing School cultures dominated by high-stakes tests are creating more and more reluctant learners. Sharon L. Nichols and David C. Berliner S ince the passage of No Child Left Behind (NCLB), students have been exposed to an unprecedented numberof tests. EvetA year in grades 3-8 and at least once in high school, irtually all public school students take tests in math and reading (and soon science). Students also take regular benchmark tests—supposedly to predict performance on the mandated tests—and district assessments throughout the school year. The time spent talking about, preparing for, and taking tests has increased exponentially. What bas all this testing achieved? Five years after NCLB v^’as enacted, tbere is no convincing evidence that student learning has increased in any significant way on tests otber than the slates’ ovm tests. On measures sucb as the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), no reliable increases in scores have occurred, nor bave acblevement gaps between students of higher and lower socioeconomic classes narrowed. •^^ In contrast, a wealth of documenta- don indicates that tbe unintended and largely negative effects of bigh-stakes testing are pervasive and a cause for concern {see Jones, Jones, & Hargrove, 2003; Orfield & Komhaber, 2001). Tn our own research, we have documented hundreds of cases in which bigh-stakes testing bas banned teaching and learning (Nicbols & Berliner, 2007). For example, high-stakes testing bas been associated witb suspicious forms of data manipulation, as well as outright cheating. Tbe tests undermine teacher- student relalionsbips, lead to a narrowing of tbe curriculum, demoralize teacbers, and bore students. Research bas not fully examined tbe impact of tbis test- dominated scbool environment on students’ attitudes and dispositions toward learning. But we suspect ibat for most students, scbooling is less joyful ihan it was; and for reluctant learners, schooling is worse than ever. Overvaluing Testing, Undervaluing Learning From the mouvation luerature, we know tbat learners are more likely to enjoy learning when activities are mean- ingful, fun, or interesting. Yet, again and again, higb-stakes testing dlminisbcs the 14 EDUCATIONAL LEAtiriisiin>/M..Hcji 200H I Out of Learning The time spent talking about, preparing for, and taking tests has increased exponentially. Fun and meaning of learning. Under pressure to prepare students lo perform well in math and reading, teachers engage in repetitious instruction that boils down content lo isolated bits of information, leaving little time to engage in creative inierdisciplinary activities or project-based inquiry. One Colorado teacher reports. Our district told us to focus on reading, writing, and mathematics. … In the past I had hatched out baby chicks in the class- room as part ol ihe science unii. 1 don’t have time to do thai. … We don’t do community outreach like we used to, like visiting the nursing home or cleaning up the park that we had adopted. (Taylor, Shepard, Ktnncr, & Rosenthal, 2ai3, p. 51) We also know ihat students are more hardworking and persistent when they perceive the purpose of learning as self-improvement or achievement of personal goals. Yet a higb-stakes lesiing climate sends a message that the primary purpose of learning is to score well on the test. Sometimes leaching to the test is blatanl, as when teachers assign daily worksheets taken from released older versions of the test. Sometimes it is less obvious, as when instruction is based on the specific information that will be on the test. One teacher explains, I’m leaching more tesl-taking skills and how to use your time wisely Also what to look for in a piece of literature and how to underline important details, rhere is a lot more ume spent on teaching those kinds of skills. . . . Read quesiions, restate the question in your answer, write so the person grading the test can read it, etc. (Taylor et al., 2003, p. 39) As a result of the overvaluing of test results, the curriculum has narrowed. All across the United States, tbe time devoted to untested subjects like art, music, and social studies has been reduced or eliminated completely so that schools can teach more math, reading, writing, and now science. For example, in Kansas in 2006, high school freshmen were required to “double dose” their English classes instead of participating in electives. In a California middle school, students were required to take two periods of all core subjects and funding was dropped for music, Spanish, art, and classes in the trades and industrial design (Zastrow & Jane, 2006). ASSOCIATION FOR SUPERVISION AND CURRICULUM 15 In 2006, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation released a report on the reasons students drop out of scbool (Bridgeland, Dilulio, & Morison, 2006). In tbis small survey of students who bad already dropped out, 47 percent reported that school was “uninter- esting.” About 70 percent commented tbat tbey didn’t feel “mspired” at scbool. For such reluctant learners, the increased test preparation and narrower curriculum resulting from bigh-stakes testing exacerbates tbe problem. Faced witb an increasingly disjointed, decon- textualized curriculum, many become actively disengaged; otbers simply leave. I Pledge Allegiance to theTest A disturbing phenomenon popping up in more and more U.S. schools is tbe prevalence of scboolwide pep rallies, ice cream socials, and other peculiar events meant to “motivate” students to do well on tbe state-mandated test. For example, one Texas high scbooi held a rally for parents, teachers, and students during which tbe principal informed parents of tbe importance of the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) and compared it to a marathon, in which “students need endurance.” He was not subtle wben be said, “This is tbe test of your lives!” This speech was followed by a class pledge in which students prom- ised to “pass tbe test and take Parker High School to the top and lead us to exemplary” (Foster, 2006). This is not an isolated incident. In one New York scbool, every spring just before test time, the principal brings students together to sing songs ibat will “inspire” tbem before and during the test. Some songs included “I’m a Believer” and “I’ve Been Working on My Writing” (Toy, 2006). Bulletin boards, posters, and daily mantras constitute additional forms of explicit empbasis on tbe importance of tests. Clicbed slogans often appear on posters and banners tbrougbout the scbool. Messages like ‘Take Us to Exem- plary” are pervasive in many Texas scbools. Wben teachers report that most of their time is spent preparing for tbe test. bigbly as tbeir better-performing peers. Sadly some teacbers and principals bave done all sorts of unprofessional things to ensure that test-score suppressors either pass (because of rigorous test-prep activ- ities or even more questionable tneans) or are dropped from testing altogether. For example, more than 500 low-scoring students in Binningham, Alabama, were administratively “dropped” from school just days before state testing (Orel, 2003). Scores rose, principals received substantial bonuses, and bundrcds of students bad tbeir lives made infinitely more difficult in the process. Sucb actions belp to transform slow learners Chronic failure is demeaning, causing many otherwise highly engaged students to give up, drop out, or become increasingly cynical about schooling. when we go into scboois and find bundreds of posters related to tbe upcoming test, when we bear of scbools witb daily announcements about the “test standard of the day,” and wben students tell us tbat not a day goes by v-ithout mention of the test, we can be preity sure tbat the test bas become tbe primary focus for learning. Marginalizing Youth High-stakes tesung encourages teacbers to view students not in terms of their potential, or wbat unique or new quali- ties they bring to the learning environ- ment, but ratber as test-score increasers or suppressors. Students quickly pick tbis up and realize tbey are defined as winners or losers on the basis of their test scores. Test-score suppressors receive the clear message ibat tbey are not valued as into reluctant learners, compounding their problems in school. Issues associated witb test score suppressors are exacerbated in states where bigb scbool students bave to pass a test to receive a diploma. Hundreds of students are dropping out or opting to take tbe GED route, mainly because passing the test has become an insur- mountable obstacle to tbem. Tbis is especially true for special education students and Englisb language leamers (ELLs). Tbousands try as bard as they can but cannot pass the test despite meeting all other graduation require- ments. Chronic failure is demeaning, causing many otberwise bigbly engaged students to give up, drop out, or become increasingly cynical about scbooting. Tbe bigh-stakes testing culture commu- nicates to students tbat tbeir other abili- ties are of no value. Outstanding talent 16 EDUCATIONAL 2008 in dance, welding, art, knowledge of the U.S. Civil War, computer programming, consensus building in small groups, foreign languages, acting, and so forth count for little. Even students who score high may become less motivated as a result of the high-stakes testing culture. These test- score increasers often feel “ustid”—for example, when they are pressured to take the test even when they are sick. As a resull, they may adopt cynical attitudes about the purpose of being in school. As one student points out, The TAKS is a big joke.. . . This is the easiest test you could ever lake. … I mean, forget logarithms and algebra. Forget knowing about government and the Bill of Rights. Instead, we read a two-page story and then answer 11 short questions about it such as, “What was the meaning of the wordjudie in paragraph two? A: generous, B; deceptive, C: useless, and D: apple- sauce.” (“Teen Talk,” 2007) Learners Weigh In ^A’hc^ many studeiiis see education as punitive and uninteresting, and when they have their abilities narrowly defined by a single test score, the potential for irreparable and damaging consequences is high. For students who struggle academically, htgh-stakes testing can diminish their sense of sell worth, leading to decreased motivation to do well in school. And for students who see tbe tests as an easy rite of passage, a school culture formed around high- stakes testing is boring and unconnected. Thus, high-stakes testing cultures build reluctant learners out of even these academically talented students. How do we know ibis? Tbe voices of youth are pretty clear. They understand ihe exaggerated importance cf tests in ibeir lives, and it frustrates them, A 12th writes. Students (teachers as well) focus on only the TAKS. Its almost as if they have been given an ultimaium: Either p£.ss the lest and get the ticket out of there, or pass the test months later and live with the disap- pointment all your life. Its not fair. (“Teen Talk.” 2007) Others find tbe tests debumanizing and feel angry about the narrow curriculum being forced on them. They worr)’ that tbeir schooling ignores other aspects of ibeir lives. An 1 lib grade student writes, In Texas many public school dislricts bave found raising their standardized testing averages to be tbe No, 1 goal of classroom curriculum. Consequently, school is no longer a forum where students can discuss the effects of alcohol, or tbe best method to achieve a life filled with value and pleasure, or the simple antics of their daily life. (“Teen Talk,” 2007) The pressure to achieve is highest in high-poverty schools because they are most likely to be shut down or reconsol- idaied under NCLB. There, the score suppressors are often force-fed a daily curriculum that includes bits of informa- tion devoid of any connection to tbeir real iives, Foster (2006), talking wilb Latino students attending a high-poverty high school heard, “We learn in isola- tion. We leam one skill one day or in a week and then we never see it again until test time.” (p. 143), Another Latino student in the same school commented, 1 was written up and sent to the office because 1 didn’t wani to do a TAKS assign- ment, I was told in ibe oflice tbat I had to do it because it was important that 1 pass this test. 1 atn tired of doing TAKS, TAKS, TAKS. I am not learning anything, (Foster, 2006, p. 144) Especially revealing are the following excerpts from a transcript of one teachers attempt to motivate her 16 Latino 11th graders. Tbe teacher bad just handed out an essay similar to those tbat would be on tbe upcoming state test. Her goal was to motivate and inspire students to perform well on tbe Lest. But students were savvy about what was happening, TEACHER: OK, this is last-minute work for TAKS. You can pass the test. You don’t want to take it again, right? STUDENTS: NO response. TEACHER: Please say yes. STUDENTS: NO response. TEACHER: YOU are brilliant The test is not hard. Take your time; in fact take all the time you need. ASSOCIATION FOR SUPHRVIMON ANO CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 17 STUDENTS: NO respome. TEACHER: OK, there will bt- three types of open-ended questions and three types of literary seleciions. What does “literary” mean? STUDENTS: NO response. TEACHER: IS it fiction, nonfiction, or biography? S’lTJDENTS: No response. TEACHER: Are you going to talk to me or you don’t know? STLIDENTS: Nti response. TEACHER: (in an angry voice) It’s fiction, you all. (puH.sf) First thing you do is answer tbe question. It must be insightful and thoughtful. Do not restate the ques- tion. You have five lines to fill in. Then you have to support a response. If you summarize in an open-ended question you get a zero. But if you use suppon for the passage, you get points- Look at this essay. Do you see how this student used textual suppon? STUDENTS: NO response. TEACHER: (in an angry voice) Come on! STUDENTS: NO response. (Foster, 2006, pp, 155-158) And on it goes. Another exciting day at scbool marked only by passive resistance to what students accurately perceive to be an inferior (and boring) education. What Can We Do? High-stakes tests are not likely to go away, but schools can and should try to minimize their harmtul eifects. Schools should at least refrain from engaging tn test-prep rallies, ice cream socials, or social events that focus specifically on tbe test. Sucb activities only reinforce the impression that the test is tbe primary goal of schooling. If schools want to bold such events to create a sense of community, tbey might simply rename the events to emphasize learning, not testing (for example, a Rally for Learning). Of course, tbe learning cele- brated has to be genuine: completing outstanding science fair projects; A high-stakes testing climate sends a message that the primary purpose of learning is to score well on the test. presenting classroom projects to tbe town council; writing poetry, essays, or a play; and so fortb. Schools need lo reward demonstrations of learning in all its varieties. Aditiinistrators and teachers should work together to reframe the purposes of learning in their school. As a start, elitTii- nate tbe word “test” from any banner, poster, or encouraging slogan. Instead, use language tbat focuses on mastering knowledge, improving indiidual performance, or seeing tbe value of schooling for enhancing one’s future. In addition, teachers and administra- tors should strive to create a climate of caring and cooperation, instead of competition. We know that students are more likely to attend scbool and excel when they feel they belong. Feelings of connection lead to greater effort, greater persistence, and positive attitudes. Feel- ings of rejection bave tbe opposite effects. Significant changes in NCLB are unlikely to occur soon. This law bas not only exacerbated the problems of reluc- tant learners already in our schools, but also manufactured additional reluctant leamcrs for tbe schools to deal vvith. It is up to administrators and teachers to mitigate the damaging effects of this untenable law on many of our students by proactively working to diminish the importance of bigb-stakes testing in schools. 10 References Bridgeland,J. M,, Dilulio,J. j., &r Morison, K. B. (2006). The silent epidemic Perspec- lives oj iiigli school dropouts. Wasbington, DC: Civic Enterprises. Available: www , civicenterprises.net/pdfs/tbesi lent epidemic3-06.pdl Foster, S. L. (2006). How iMtino slLidenis nego- tiate the demands oj high-stakes lesling: A case study of one school in Texas. Unpub- lished doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University, Tempe. Jones, M. C, Jones, B., & Hargrove, T. (2003). The unintended consequences of high-stakes testing, bmbain. MD: Rowman and Littlefield, Nichols, S, L, & Berliner, D. C. (2007). Collateral damage: How high-stakes testing conupis America’s schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Fducation Press. Orel, S. (2003). Left behind in Birmingbam: 522 pushed-out students. In R. C. Lent (Si G. Pipkin, (lids.), Siknt no more: Voices of courage in American schools (pp. 1-14). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Orfield, G., & Kornhaber. M. L. (Eds.), (2001), Raising standards or raising harners? Inequalily and high stakes testing in public education. New York: Century Foun- dation Press. Teen taik: Tackling TAKS. (2007, Marcb 9), San Anlonio Bxpress-Ncws, pp. Fl, 5. Available: www.mysanantonio.conVsalife /ieenteam/stories/MYSA030907.01RTAKS. llxllOchtml Taylor. G., Shepard, L., Kinner, E, 6? Rosenthal, J. (2003), A survey of teachers’ perspectives an high-slakes testing in Colorado: WIitK gets taught, what gets lost (CSF Technical Report 588). Los Angeles: University of Calilomia. Toy, V (2006, January 1). Elmontfe scbool success is a lesson to others. New York Times, Sec. 14LI. p. 1. Zastrow, C, &Janc, H. (2006). The condition of the liberal arts in America’s pubhc schools: A report to the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Council lor Basic Education. Sharon L. Nichols is Assistant Professor, College of Education and Human Devel- opment, tjniversity of Texas at San Antonio; [email protected] David C. Berliner is Regents Professor, Mary Lou Fulton College of Education, Arizona State University, Tempe; [email protected], 18 hDUCATIONAL L E A I) F. H S H ] p/M A R CH 2008
Article Critique 7-3
Article Critique Guidelines and Rubric Overview Articles are written to inform, misinform, influence, or misdirect, among other reasons. Sometimes they serve as nothing more than a vehicle for an author to achieve fame, notoriety, and wealth. You should never take at face value the elements of any article you read, but you should be able to: Differentiate between fact and opinion Recognize and evaluate author bias and rhetoric Determine cause-and-effect relationships Determine accuracy and completeness of information presented Recognize logical fallacies and faulty reasoning Compare and contrast information and points of view Develop inferential skills Make judgments and draw logical conclusions When writing an article critique, you will need to summarize, evaluate, and offer critical comment on the ideas and information that the author(s) presents in the article. Starting in Module Two, you are assigned two articles to read, which are located in Module Resources for that specific module. You have to select one of the two articles and write a critique of it. In your paper, cite any and all information taken from the article or any other references used. Your goal should be to read and understand the article, analyze the findings or arguments, and evaluate and comment on the article. Reading the Article Allow enough time to understand it. Read the article without taking notes to gain an overall picture of its main idea. Read the article again analytically highlighting important ideas and making brief notes of the main ideas and main topic. Main Elements Be sure to address the following within your article critique: What is the issue that the article is specifically addressing? Is this a significant problem or issue related to the concepts and theory in this course? Why or why not? What references did the author use in this article? Did the article contain research? What data was used? What instruments, if any, were used to collect data? What were some of the conclusions, if any, to the research in this article? Was the article reliable and valid? Explain. Was this article well written? Thoughtful and reflective? What were the limitations in this article? Any variables? Any other thoughts, comments? Rubric Requirements of submission: Written components of projects must follow these formatting guidelines when applicable: double spacing, 12-point Times New Roman font, one-inch margins, and discipline-appropriate citations. Page length should be 2-3 pages, not including cover page and resources. Instructor Feedback: Students can find their feedback in the grade book as an attachment. Critical Elements Exemplary Proficient Needs Improvement Not Evident Value Main Elements Includes almost all of the main elements and requirements and cites multiple examples to illustrate each element (23-25) Includes most of the main elements and requirements and cites many examples to illustrate each element (20-22) Includes some of the main elements and requirements (18-19) Does not include any of the main elements and requirements (0-17) 25 Quality of Article Critique Provides an in-depth critique of the main elements; lists and explains examples of bias or faulty reasoning found in the article (23-25) Critiques the main elements; lists and explains any examples of bias or faulty reasoning found in the article (20-22) Attempts to critique the main elements and list examples of bias or faulty reasoning found in the article (18-19) Fails to critique the main elements, does not include any examples of bias or faulty reasoning found in the article (0-17) 25 Inquiry and Analysis Explores multiple issues through extensive collection and in-depth analysis of evidence to make informed conclusions (14-15) Explores some issues through collection and in-depth analysis of evidence to make informed conclusions (12-13) Explores minimal issues through collection and analysis of evidence to make informed conclusions (11) Does not explore issues through collection and analysis of evidence and does not make informed conclusions (0-10) 15 Integration and Application All of the course concepts are correctly applied (9-10) Most of the course concepts are correctly applied (8) Some of the course concepts are correctly applied (7) Does not correctly apply any of the course concepts (0-6) 10 Research Incorporates many scholarly resources effectively that reflect depth and breadth of research (14-15) Incorporates some scholarly resources effectively that reflect depth and breadth of research (12-13) Incorporates very few scholarly resources that reflect depth and breadth of research (11) Does not incorporate scholarly resources that reflect depth and breadth of research (0-10) 15 Writing (Mechanics/Citations) No errors related to organization, grammar and style, and citations (9-10) Minor errors related to organization, grammar and style, and citations (8) Some errors related to organization, grammar and style, and citations (7) Major errors related to organization, grammar and style, and citations (0-6) 10 Earned Total: Comments: 100%