Accountability or Creativity?

This one almost slipped in under the radar, it being August and all (kind of like dropping the long census form 'almost' slipped under the radar). It seems the Ontario Elementary Teachers Federation (ETFO) wants the government to put a 3 year moratorium on the annual Education Quality and Accountability Office (EQAO) tests for grades 3 and 6.

In case you don't have children in elementary school the EQAO tests are administered annually in grades 3 and 6 to test whether or not the curriculum is being followed properly in the classroom. Kind of like those annual performance evaluations we have all had to endure in our working careers.

The ETFO contends that these tests are sapping the creativity and confidence in children, turning schools into 'a series of hoops' children need to jump through.  This I find somewhat ironic given that the EQAO tests are meant to test the performance of the curriculum and teachers vs. children.

In particular the ETFO believes classroom assessments (rather than EQAO) are invaluable because they:

• Support student learning;
• Assess the whole child;
• Measure a variety and levels of skills;
• Determine student progress;
• Take into account contextual factors that may affect results;
• Are appropriate and responsive to student learning needs; and
• Incorporate authentic forms of assessment that are aligned with the curriculum.

The EQAO on the other hand, according to the ETFO, do not give parents a true picture of their child’s progress. This is because:

• During the tests, students cannot interact with their teachers or other students. This is not a normal classroom experience.
• Multiple choice tests don’t accurately assess student knowledge, critical thinking ability, or many of the other skills and knowledge outlined in the provincial curriculum.
• The tests don’t assess the whole child or the whole curriculum.
• The tests provide only one assessment; good program decisions require many assessments.
• Test data do little to provide real help to students, parents, or schools. The test results are never shared with the student, only the marks.
• Resources used to create, administer, and mark the tests would be better spent supporting students and teachers in the classroom.
• School boards release the school scores to the media. This results in schools being ranked without important background information about factors contributing to the results.

Now that is interesting:

• Why do children need to interact with other children or the teacher during testing?  When I went to school such interactions usually meant my test was ripped up and I was expelled from the examination.
• If multiple choice doesn't accurately test knowledge et al how come the Waterloo Math Championship (one of the premiere mathematics competitions in the world!) uses it?
• I am not sure what this 'whole child' is all about. Are we talking in a Rogerian sense, where tests become encounter groups?
• The EQAO are a snapshot of progress. Over time I suspect it gives a pretty accurate set of pictures of where our education is going.
• Test data is there to help shape the curriculum and accountability of teachers – not parents and students.
• At  $17 dollars per child the EQAO would seem to be a better deal than the money Bluewater is spending acquiring new laptop for teachers.
• True school rankings can be a bugbear in our 'MTV – short attention span' world, but it has to be remembered that the emphasis of the EQAO is the curriculum and teachers and not the students!

Like any workplace teachers run the gamut from the 'uber-excellent' to the 'barely getting by' and the EQAO should be a yardstick to expose weaknesses and strengths in the teaching cadre. The same can be said for the curriculum. The EQAO also needs to be an evolving tool, relevant to the present and a useful guide to the future. Can we afford to put the evolution of our children's education into limbo for 3 years, one quarter of their public school education?

Already we are seeing Ontario and Canada starting to lag in education excellence, overtaken by other countries with a higher commitment to public education (Canada currently ranks 5th in OISR rankings). Without a diagnostic tool to make sure that we are producing the best education possible for our children how can we not lag further behind?

One of the biggest concerns I hear from teachers and principals is the sheer amount of paperwork and administration teachers deal with as part of their job. Administering the EQAO certainly adds more paperwork to their schedule. But there still needs to be an impartial measuring stick to keep the ship heading in the right direction.

EQAO may not be perfect but it can be an effective tool, as long as we remember what it is meant to test.

* * * * *

Sources: The Globe and Mail, WikiAnswers, ETFO, The Fraser Institute