Donate now

Privacy Policy

Protection of privacy is our first concern, and SQE does not sell or trade information provided by its subscribers or supporters. Your information is used to process donations and newsletter subscriptions, and to contact you about upcoming publications and events.

feed iconRSS Feed

Follow Us
Follow SQESocQualEd
on Twitter

Please note Downloads require you to have the Adobe Reader installed, you can get it here for free Adobe.com

 

 
 
Society for Quality Education

Subscribe to our mailing list

Time to Ditch the Helicopters

May 21, 2016 by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) at 08:40 AM

GUEST BLOG BY SARAH WARRY-POLJANSKI, SQE DIRECTOR

It's almost time for students here in Ontario to write their EQAO tests, and the on-going debate over standardized testing is heating up.

In recent years people have made testing sound like the boogeyman who is coming to take away children's happiness, a teacher's dignity, or the system's pride. People are afraid that if their child doesn't do well on standardized testing that it will hinder their learning abilities and ruin their future. Teachers may be afraid that if students aren't successful, it means it's their fault and they were not effective at teaching.  The education system may fear that results will negatively impact how the public perceives them and their methods of educating our children.

Everyone  needs to relax. No one is testing your child with nefarious intentions of ruining their future , and no one is going to start burning teachers at the stake. The system, well, it should be afraid. It holds a large responsibility, and if it’s not being met, it should be held accountable.

I don't mind having my children tested in school. Why? I personally want to know if my children doing well. That's why they are there isn't it, to learn?  A Peterborough parent long ago asked: What is Johnny supposed to know? By when is he supposed to know it, and how do I know that he knows it?  Without testing, how do we know whether kids are achieving, whether they need help, or whether they may have a learning disability that requires further investigation? The negativity surrounding tests is becoming a fad, and perhaps a dangerous one.

For the EQAO, I'm not that bothered. I've read the Fraser Institute's reports and I've seen what they do with it. The picture certainly isn't as clear, straight forward, and pretty as we would like, but we do have a less than impressive curriculum, so test scores will naturally mirror that . If anything, we need to stop our anxious thoughts and worries about tests. Tests are needed to measure achievement. Of course we can say " Kids can be examined during the school year based on how well they do on tasks and assignments, testing is not necessary". Sure, we can say that, but sometimes students also need to be put in a situation like testing to make sure that even under pressure they are able to perform at a certain level .

Let's look at a few things and see how your bias changes. Would you feel safe if we handed out drivers' licenses to people without testing them? Would you have open-heart surgery by a doctor who didn't attend medical school or failed his medical exam? Or would you let a tradesperson without a gas ticket or who failed his C of Q do work in your home? I'm going to assume you said no to at least half of these things.  

People are put under stress when they drive, when they operate, even when they are doing jobs that might not seem stressful to others. Being able to perform under stress is a remarkable skill to have, and it is one we should encourage our children to develop. Our students will one day become our doctors and tradespeople, they will become the people who work and run our economy. They will have to pass tests in order to get to where they want to be and do the things they want to do . If we start discouraging testing because of our own fears and bad experiences, we are going to take away opportunities from them, and that is not fair. We cannot push our own insecurities onto our children because, at the end of the day when they become adults, they will live with those burdens, not us.

We have become a generation of helicopter parents who shelter our children to the point that we are  taking away their ability to learn through natural curiosity, their ability to make judgment calls on their own, and their ability to learn self control and responsibility.  Children, like any other conscious species on this planet, are designed to learn through experience. If we don't let them experience testing and being put under pressure, it will only hinder them later and cause much more anxiety and unneeded stress as adults.

If you have questions about your child's testing being done, please ask your child's teacher or school. Don't just jump on the bandwagon without informing yourself. We live in a rapidly-changing world, but there are a few things that will always be certain, and pressure and anxiety are one of them. We are humans, we have emotions and thoughts. Talking to your children about their thoughts and feelings is one way to make testing less stressful for both them and you. 

It is up to us as parents to give our children as many opportunities as possible and to make sure we are preparing them for the future the best we can. Encourage success in your children,  and teach them to accept failure and learn from it how to do better.

Share this article

Comments

I have witnessed the stress grade three children go through with the EQAO testing and am appalled that our education system on one hand has implemented play based learning as a method of creating a happy and healthy introduction to the learning process, only to create undue stress for the same children in grade three.  The children hear from their peers that it’s not a fun process and the “pressure and anxiety” continues.
EQAO testing is an additional, and in my opinion worthless secondary testing that in all the years of it being implemented had resulted in no significant improvement in our children’s education.  Blaming the parents is a red herring in my opinion.
Putting the over $30 million annually towards extra teaching staff in the early years to give help to children who can be identified in SK as needing extra help will go further to prevent the dismal education results that are continuing.
There is no meaningful follow-up to turn around and improve the results of the children who do poorly on the testing results.  Since you used surgeons as an example, it would be like a cardiologist identifying the heart condition and then not doing the surgery to correct the condition.  I would love to see surgery be done.  In education this has been demonstrated with the 60% improvement that was achieved when Paul Martin organized a team of specialists to turn around the Kettle Point and Walpole Island schools.  If EQAO was able to demonstrate those kind of results no one would object to testing.

Posted by Edda Manley on 05/22 at 09:53 PM

Well said, Edda.

Posted by Christina on 05/23 at 08:03 PM

I am not against the testing. I feel that it is another barometer by which we can see the needs of our child. However, I think if you get tested, you should have an oppurtunity to look at the test and learn from it. Numbers and grades are meaningless unless there are comments and feedback associated with them. That is the only way to learn. It’s too bad that this is not the case.

Posted by Mita on 05/24 at 03:39 PM

For regular report card testing, which happens in every grade, comments and feedback have in the past been the norm.  One report card, well prepared, individually for each child is all that is necessary.
Nowadays the Ministry of Education has taken the personalization out of comments by providing a selection of pre-prepared and “approved” comments for the teachers to select from and “click” onto the regular report card.
The numbers and grades are meaningful only to those who are selling their houses in neighbourhoods where high.  school results are achieved.  I heard recently the school rating is then shown on the real estate listing.  To me over $30 million each year is taxpayer money benefiting very few, and certainly NOT the students.

Posted by Edda Manley on 05/24 at 04:13 PM

Edda Manley when my child was inGr.4, the only indication we had, as parents, that something was very wrong with her arithmetic skillset, was based on the results of the standardized test she received. Report cards these days are a bit of a joke at the elementary level, at least here in BC, as grades are no longer required.  Rather, an “assessment” is given to indicate if kids “Exceed Expectations”, “Do Not Exceed Expectations”, and “Not Exceeding Expectations”.  Hard to make sense of any of that, and standards are changing once again here in BC, as this nonsense will now continue throughout Middle School.  Kids will start getting their first grades in high school…keeping parents in the dark for far too long, to see where improvement is required.

Teacher bias is a factor as well.  In BC, standards within the curriculum are very weak, even non-existent, and there are no priorities being given to determine if students are actually learning anything significant.  An “engaged” student does not indicate they’re learning anything…rather, they are being kept “busy”.

Standardized tests are not perfect, and I do not believe that one should peg everything on them in terms of if they are useful or not.  I prefer to use them as a tool to determine if students are learning the “standards”, based on what is occurring in the classroom.  And I have no issue with school rankings either.  Why?  Because the evidence suggests it’s helpful both to teachers, and to students:

“The C.D. Howe Report also found that provinces that collect data on student performance and publish the data by school showed better student performance on PISA.

This is also a finding in a report by the OECD on autonomy and accountability, which found that student performance is stronger in countries where schools post achievement data publicly.

Interestingly, PEI introduced standardized testing in Grades 3, 6 and 9 over the last five years. In this round of PCAP, PEI made a remarkable recovery from their 2010 last place finish and jumped ahead of several other provinces.”

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/no-surprise-in-manitoba-students-poor-math-showings-1.2792542

The system is far from perfect, but instead of eliminating the only tool that exists to ensure the system is actually working appropriately, we should determine more effective ways to determine the standards are being upheld in a professional manner, as is the norm in all other professions.

Posted by Tara Houle on 05/25 at 09:59 PM

I agree that no “one” test is perfect.  My suspicion would be that the report cards have been structured to give less of an evaluation to build up the impression that standardized tests produce more/better evaluations.
The fact remains that testing in Grade three for many children comes too late to be of significant value for those who are doing poorly..  Earlier assessment AND INTERVENTION to help struggling students, we know is more beneficial than testing and then doing precious little to improve the results. 
Unfortunately from what I have observed through the years that standardized testing has been implemented, is that overall there has been very little improvement.  If anything, as happened in the US, the tests and teaching tactics are obfuscating true results.

Posted by Edda Manley on 05/26 at 08:21 AM

My objection to EQAO testing is that it reflects the education system itself - utterly bogged down, and clogged up with paper. Look no further than the wall of curriculum documents and missives behind every teacher’s desk - so wordy, scattered, and cumbersome, It’s borderline un-useable. Math books and EQAO are the same.
As teachers, we used to have a variety of succinct tests we would use in September to get a handle on students’ achievement levels. These would produce a score and grade range. We could score them ourselves, and the scores gave us a snapshot of student achievement that we could share with parents. Even the levels for scoring EQAO tests are cumbersome and wordy, not to mention unfamiliar to parents.
If I ran the zoo, I would make these commercial tests available to teachers, and probably include a spring one. Technology can make scoring a breeze, but I’d consider hiring all those out of work grads to collect the data and turn it into statistics. I’d have no choice but to reduce everything about the administration of our Ed system to a fraction of its current size to order to pull it out of the quagmire.

Posted by Chrisstina on 05/26 at 02:15 PM

Well there has been overall improvement in provinces where standardized testing is now implemented. I am not sure if either Christina or Edda read the article I linked, when it points out the improvement PEI experienced when Standardized Testing came into play, and how MB’s results declined when they got rid of it. 

Empirical evidence doesn’t lie.

Experiences are valuable, but so are assessments. Our Standardized Tests are a far cry from those implemented in the US.  Our kids have them 3 times in the course of their schooling career; in the US kids have them as regularly as once/mo.

I don’t think it’s a stretch to ask our kids to write them 3 times in 12 years.  Nothing wrong with having a wide assortment of tools in the toolkit.

Posted by Tara Houle on 05/26 at 07:11 PM

Sorry. I thought we were questioning the value of EQAO tests not the value of standardized testing in general.
A colleague of mine “evaluated” EQAO tests for a number of years and claimed that one summer, it was determined that his group was marking too low, so someone was sent in to correct that. Another year, in a different group, they were advised they were marking too high. so how standardized are they really?
To the point, I don’t fault students for feeling stressed by them. They go on for three days I think. But considering all the hoopla preparing for EQAO, make that weeks. Heck, EQAO stresses out teachers. Parents get stressed when their kids are stressed. Viewing this stress as a life lesson is completely bogus, particularly when there are way better, compact, standardized tests on the market.

Posted by Christina on 05/26 at 10:47 PM

Edda,
I read about Paul Martin’s project on Walpole Island but I couldn’t find out what the teachers actually did over the (2 or 3) years to improve students’ EQAO test results. Do you know?

Posted by Christina on 05/27 at 12:27 PM

True, the article
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/aboriginal-literacy-pilot-project-dramatically-improves-test-scores/article23169553/comments/  did not outline the specifics of this initiative
Here’s information we do know from the article:
1) The focus was on literacy because as Paul Martin accurately stated,“if you don’t learn to read and write by Grade 3, you are handicapped all the way through”
2) They assembled education experts to work with the local teachers under a model of the Ontario government used to turn around struggling schools a decade ago.
PLEASE RE-READ POINT #2
This tells me the Ministry of Education KNOWS EXACTLY how to get best results with the students.
The question then is, Whys are they not doing this in ALL SCHOOLS for ALL STUDENTS?
3) “Number one is getting the teachers on board and believing in the students”
I would add another component to the above triad, and that is get the parents on board as much as possible as well.
Giving full disclosure here, I am not a teacher, I am a handwriting advocate.  Through the past 15 years that I have been following the gradual and steady decline of our education system…following as always, the decline in the USA, I have learned a great deal about education through this journey.
An excellent book to read is The Prize which a journalist wrote after researching the dismal results of Mark Zukerberg donating $10 million to the New Jersey education system and getting dismal results.  From that book you will learn many things in education that do NOT work.
Another thing that is important to be aware of is that the Ontario teachers’ union, just days before this year’s EQAO testing was to take place, publicly advised the teachers to not have THEIR children participate in this years EQAO testing.

Posted by Edda Manley on 05/27 at 09:09 PM

One important aspect of EQAO and ANY testing of any type is what one does with the results. In order to improve things teachers need the results in time to
- analyze
- determine the best approaches for improvement
- implement the approach and test the results

In the case of EQAO schools get the results to do anything with them.
So
new grade, new teacher, even “new” kid based on maturity, summer holidays etc.

Posted by Jiohn Myers on 05/28 at 10:16 AM

Exactly!  EQAO is noted for sending out information at times when they are assured (or hopeful) that no one will become aware of the information.  As I recall, the Math scores were released during the last week of August 2015 when parents and teachers would be busy getting ready for the new school year.  The initial Guest Blog, posted on the Saturday of the May 24th week-end that has started this entire dialogue is yet another example of this.  The author of the article can tell the higher ups that she indeed did something productive promoting EQAO, Most people would be spending the first long week-end of the summer season, especially with the wonderful weather, doing something other than checking their e-mails.  The EQAO people are also famous for their ability to try to put a positive spin on dismal results.  I think the euphemism for that today is “Putting lipstick on a pig”.
The greatest error of their ways, in my opinion, is 1) having the first testing in grade three when it is near the end of the window of opportunity to have literate children 2) that the results are published with no effective action plan,and no extra teacher resources to create positive rather than negative results.  They push this on to the individual boards and let them deal with it.  The EQAO people feel they have done a great job in identifying the students/schools that require help and then blame the boards/teachers.
I have stated many times that JK and SK teachers who have several years of teaching experience can effectively identify the students that are likely to have learning difficulties and should receive extra intervention.  One SK teacher who raised the alarm bells about this need in a child she knew had great potential mentioned it to every teacher in the years following, and finally in Grade 5 he was tested.
This is not an isolated case, this happens to far too many students on a regular basis.
The Ministry of Education is promoting the fact that they are “graduating” more students than ever before.  The fact is, many of these students are totally illiterate, unable to read even basic signs like the word “restroom”, unable to do simple arithmetic like add 17+16 (the answer I was given by this young man was “Well I know it’s more than 30”), and yet they will receive a diploma stating that they have “Graduated” from our education system.  Mind you, there is substantial paper work documenting that the schools are not to blame for this - another thorn in teachers’ sides.

Posted by Edda Manley on 05/29 at 08:25 AM

Leave A Comment

Be polite and respectful. Stay on-topic. State your position clearly and write succinctly. Provide support for claims. Don't hog the microphone. Strong opinions are OK, but outrage is not. Don't post just to upset others.

Name:

Email (required but not displayed):

Emotions

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below: