In this chapter, 132 teachers ranging from Kindergarten to Grade 12 in the United States were surveyed about their thoughts about their assessment system in their school as well as the assessment of non-tested subjects. Participants provided multiple alternatives focused on performance-based assessment, focusing on growth instead of achievement, as well as the need to have more teacher input in creating high-stakes assessments. The implications of this study can inform policy makers as well as state and district educational leaders who are in positions of power to select, modify, and create these assessments.
TopBackground
In the United States, the report “A Nation at Risk: An Imperative for Educational Reform,” called for a change in student performance to prepare them for the workplace, and the No Child Left Behind Act shortly followed (Moon, Brighton, Jarvis, & Hall, 2007). The No Child Left Behind Act sought to hold teachers and students accountable to a national standard of knowledge, which soon equated to a marked increase in standardized testing in mathematics, reading, and occasionally science (Garcia, Jones, & Isaacson, 2015).
Walker (2014)
stated the following:
NCLB has corrupted what it means to teach and what it means to learn,’ explains NEA President Lily Eskelsen Garcia. ‘Teachers have to teach in secret and hope they don’t get into trouble for teaching to the Whole Child instead of teaching to the test. (p.1).
The creation of standardized testing has affected how the curriculum is being shaped and taught in the American school system. Community feelings, effective citizenship, and improper resources all drive the need for alternative test formats (Judson, 2013).
Standardized Testing: Defined
Standardized testing is a “tool for reform through their use of measure of the quality of the education system, and as the foundation for curriculum and instructional practices” (Louis, Febey & Schroeder, 2005, as cited in Moon, Brighton, Jarvis, & Hall, 2007, p.7). While standardized testing provides students with the same opportunity to show a narrow kind of knowledge that is privileged by the tests themselves, it does not allow for differentiation and a one size fits all approach is not operable in schools.
These high stakes tests increase the time allotted for mathematics and reading instruction, but often take away from non-tested such as fine arts, science (in some grades), and social studies (Garcia, Jones, & Isaacson, 2015).
Theoretical Framework
For this study, curriculum theory justifies the importance of the research topic. William Pinar describes curriculum theory as a skill-to-knowledge factory where teachers are demoted, “from scholars and intellectuals to technicians in service to the state” (Pinar, 2008, p.2). Pinar goes on to say, “Indeed, ‘educational experience’ seems precisely what politicians do not want, as they insist that we focus on test scores, the ‘bottom line.’ By linking the curriculum to student performance on standardized examinations, politicians have, in effect, taken control of what is to be taught: the curriculum” (Pinar, 2008, p.2). Similarly, when referring to curriculum, Smith (2000) said, “If the plan is tightly adhered to, there can only be limited opportunity for educators to make use of the interactions that occur. It also can deskill educators in another way” (p.1).
As Pinar and Smith have highlighted, curriculum theory is how an educational institution decides what is worth being taught and how it will be measured. While Pinar (2008) states that politicians use test scores as the bottom line, Smith (2000) focuses on the effect that the bottom line has on teachers. Both articles view the curriculum as overtaken by policy and overpowered by lack of choice. Pinar’s view on the curricula justifies the importance of studying teachers’ perceptions of the current U.S. curriculum and testing practices and non-tested subjects. Pinar (2008) defines non-tested subjects as, “the humanities and the arts, make curriculum theory a distinctive specialization within the broad field of education, a fragmented field broadly modeled after the social and behavioral sciences.” The current study aims to address why humanities, social sciences, and behavioral sciences are not being taught as much as tested subjects, such as math and reading. The research of different authors will be reviewed throughout this piece to understand the importance of this issue.