Teacher Leaders Network - NCLB - (Page 5)

Standardized Tests Fall Short of 21st Century Demands The Teacher Leaders Network members were quick to point out what their state accountability tests measured and what they did not. They agreed that the tests now being used in annual state assessments generally failed to address certain critical skills and know-how that students will need to master for success in the 21st Century. So long as these “backward looking” state assessments shape curriculum and drive instruction, they said, schools will be hard-pressed to address the learning needs identified by blue-ribbon groups like the Partnership for 21st Century Skills. As Virginia-based technology specialist Sheryl Nussbaum-Beach noted: “We are the first generation of teachers who are preparing students for jobs that haven’t even been invented yet.” - Sheryl Nussbaum-Beach, commenting on the evolving nature of teaching and 21st Century skills We are the first generation of teachers who are preparing students for jobs that haven’t even been invented yet. It is estimated that more unique new content information will be generated this year alone than was generated in the past 5,000 years. If our curriculum and standards are tied to content alone, much of what we have students memorize in their freshman year will be outdated by the time they get to college. Something has to change. Sheryl was joined by several TLN participants who lamented their own and their colleagues’ struggles with pressure to “teach to the test” when the tests focus far too much on the recall of obsolete facts or on a wide range of surface-level content knowledge. Anthony Cody, an award-winning science NBCT and peer reviewer from Oakland, California, observed the effect of this assessment-geared environment on his students: I have taught science for 18 years, and in recent years sixth graders have arrived at my classroom having had little or no first-hand experiences with science. They have read about animals and plants, but the scripted curriculum their elementary teachers are required to use does not allow time for hands-on experiments. As a result these students do not know how to pose a question, make a hypothesis, or conduct an experiment. What is worse is that they are not excited about science — they have missed out on the idea that they themselves can actually investigate the world around them and make discoveries for themselves, instead of only reading about the discoveries of others. Before the advent of NCLB, some states and school districts were evolving more genuine assessment systems. Several teachers in the TLN group commented that NCLB has, in effect, pushed aside these more multi-faceted assessments, which they believe were much closer to genuinely measuring what all students should be learning. Nancy Flanagan, an NBCT and former Michigan Teacher of the Year, discussed how her state had created more authentic and “increasingly sophisticated” assessments that required students to respond with essays, writing samples, and hands-on lab reports. However, in the wake of NCLB, these assessments were eliminated. For What Future Is NCLB Preparing Students? Indeed, several states, including Connecticut, Nebraska and Vermont, have wrestled with the U.S. Department of Education in their efforts to retain their more performance-oriented assessment systems. Some like Connecticut, which has tested its students with open-ended tasks (e.g., designing a science experiment), have sued the federal government to maintain their systems. Nebraska also has struggled to maintain its district-based and teacher-led system of content-specific assessments. Rick Wormeli spoke directly to this issue, citing the assessment research of Robert Marzano: Page 5

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Teacher Leaders Network - NCLB

Executive Summary The Future of American Education in the Making It is Time to Align NCLB Intentions and Consequences The Teacher Leaders Network Encounters NCLB from the Classroom NCLB Demands Results and So Do We Attention Alone Does Not Equal Effective Accountability Standardized Tests Fall Short of 21st Century Demands For What Future Is NCLB Preparing Students? As Testing Expands, the Curriculum Shrinks The Drive for Data Presents Potential for Significant Change Data Systems Don’t Keep Pace with Real-Time Instructional Needs AYP Highlights the Good, Bad, and Ugly of NCLB Does “Highly Qualified” Set the Teaching Bar Too Low? Teaching Quality Must Be More Than a Number Every Student Deserves a Highly Effective, Well-Trained Teacher Conclusions References

Teacher Leaders Network - NCLB

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.