Summative V. Formative Tests

A recent Education Week article referenced a survey where 85% parents and 80% teachers saw formative testing as more valuable than summative.

Summative tests measure what students have learned at the end of the year. Formative tests measure how well students are learning material as it is being taught.

Most standardized tests are used as summative measures, and they have become more prevalent in this era of No Child Left Behind. These summative assessments are called high-stakes tests because a public school’s funding and autonomy are determined by the results.  

The survey results indicate a backlash against these high-stakes, summative tests.

“Parents and teaches think that summative tests don’t give them the information they consider most valuable, and yet the pendulum has swung so far in that direction that there is a risk to other kinds of tests that actually help children learn.”

In the survey, parents and teachers also indicated that tests should monitor student progress more broadly, e.g., critical thinking, problem solving, creativity and even collaboration, which are all lauded as vital characteristics needed for success in the 21st century. Too often, standardized test questions focus on a breadth of content and skills and do not ask students to think in the higher domains of analysis, synthesis, evaluation.

Current high-stakes, summative tests typically are only in math and reading, yet the survey showed that parents and teachers see the benefit of a well-rounded education and want schools to make room for areas like the arts and physical eduction, which have been lessened, if not eliminated, in many school because of the emphasis on end-of-course assessments.

While I was not surprised that a majority of teachers saw the value of formative over summative assesments, I was pleased that parents understand their child's education is a process and not simply measured by a score on one test. Parents have been bombarded over the past ten years that tougher standardized tests were the key to improving American education. Clearly, the magic, nuance, and subtleties of education are much more complicated than a one-size-fits-all test.

I was also pleased that parents value the benefits of whole-child (cognitive, social-emotional, physical) and a well-rouned education (academics arts, physical education)--areas that Orchard has always included in its program and curriculum. 

Lessons Through Failure

In a recent Education Week article, a college admission director wrote about how he tries to dig deeper into applicant files "to find out who the students really are outside of their trophies, medals, and test scores."

He particularly likes when applicants describe a significant failure and how they dealt with it.

"It's so rare to hear stories of defeat and triumph that when we do, we cheer. If their perspectives are of lessons learned or challenges overcome, these applicants tend to jump to the top of the heap at highly selective collesge. We believe an error in high school should not define the rest of your life, but how you respond could shape you forever...Failure is about growth, learning, overcoming, and moving on. Let's allow young people to fail."

Let's allow young people to fail is not a part of any school's mission statement, but perhaps it should be.

Now that my kids are 24 and 21, I see the important lessons they've learned dealt more with adversity and challenge than with successes.

I have said many times that a parent is only as old as their oldest child. As your eldest child is growing up, it's tough to resist coming to your his/her rescue whenever he/she hits a bump in the road, no matter how small. We want the best for our children and with our oldest we are experiencing these rites of passage for the first time; we may have experienced them personally as children but that's different from the vicarious experience as parents.

I remember how nervous my wife and I were when my oldest was a high school senior and applying to college. While he was a solid student, we irrationally worried if he would even get into college.  We encouraged him to apply to more colleges than any reasonable person should. Two years later when our younger one was a high school senior, we were more relaxed and left the college selection and application process up to him, and he only applied to a few colleges.

In addition to being more involved in your oldest child's life, parents also worry that our kids' development as a student and as a person should be a smooth, continuous ascent. We worry that any hiccup might be an sign that our child is headed for trouble and has permanently deviated from the path of success. When one of my kids was in 6th grade, he failed a math test and my wife, a high school math teacher, was sure this was the beginning of the end for our son. The reality was he was beginning to test limits--as all adolescents do; he wondered if he needed to study for this test, tested his hypothesis by not studying, and--based on the result--learned an important lesson: for him, studying for a test was important.

Our kids' development will come from many disappointments:  not making a sports team, not being a straight A student, not getting the lead in the school play, not understanding a concept in class, not being in the right social group. I know it's difficult for parents to resist coming to their child's rescue--and there are certainly times when they'll need to--yet parents should be cautious about getting overly-involved with issues and disappointments that will actually help their child grow, problem-solve, and gain self-confidence--and even provide them with a great topic for their college application essay.

Beyond IQ

I teach a section of 8th grade language arts at Orchard. My wife is also a teacher at a local high school where many Orchard's graduates matriculate.

Through the years we've taught some of the same students. 

When we both began teaching, we tended to view a student's cognitive ability as the most important determinant in a student's success in our classrooms. We naively felt that students who were bright should naturally perform well in our classes and students who had less cognitive ablity should logically struggle in our classes. 

In talking about kids we've both taught, we found that, while cognitive ability is a determinant in a student's success in a classroom, a student's work ethic and attitude toward learning are far more reliable indicators. 

A recent article in Education Week Click for article and the Harvard Education Letter Click for article point out that schools, particularly public schools, are just beginning to recognize (and are efforting to measure) skills and competencies beyond cognitive ability as they are more important in preparing children for high school, college, and beyond.

In an era of high-stakes testing, some public schools have recognized that their program does not allow for creativity and innovative thinking in their students. Teaching to the test is not inherently bad: after all, Grant Wiggins has encouraged teachers for the past twenty years to be more upfront with students about how they will be asked to demonstrate their understanding of the content presented. However, too often high-stakes tests focus on broad and superficial content. Student opportunities to be creative and innovative have been forgotten in many schools because they are not skills measured in high-stakes tests. 

While I'm not sure a creativity index (as detailed in the Education Week article) is the answer, I am encouraged that schools are once again embracing the value of the arts, project-based learning, and student independent research.

The Harvard Education Letter article traces the roots of future leadership in individuals to habits and skills like embracing novel experiences and having what Carol Dweck calls a growth rather than a fixed mindset. 

What research is showing us and what teachers need to look for and develop in the classroom extends beyond a student's innate cognitive ability. In a previous blog, I referenced Tony Wagner's book, The Global Achievement Gap, where he challenges schools to emphasize the following competencies needed for success in today's world: critical thinking, problem solving, working collaboratively, taking initiative, communicating effectively, being curious and imaginative.

My wife and I now use a student's persistence, motivation, and resilience as more logical indicators of classroom success than cognitive ability.

Progressive Heads Meeting

At the recent ISACS heads of school conference in Chicago, I helped facilitate a conclave of heads from progressive schools. Out of the 200 or so ISACS schools, about 20 schools categorize themselves as progressive.

The specific question discussed was "Are progressive schools finding themselves in a more or less marketable position in a down economy and with increased global competition?"

There was an overall feeling of optimism throughout the hour-long discussion. A number of heads felt that a backlash was beginning against high-stakes testing and rigor, i.e., more homework, more content, faster pace, and more student stress. More and more parents are looking for greater balance at home and at school in their children's lives.

To most of these heads, progressive schools provide students with a competitive advantage by emphasizing the development of skills and competencies needed for success in a competitive world: critical thinking, problem solving, initiative, curiosity, imagination, collaboration, and effective communication.

Heads related stories of students who had transferred to their schools from highly traditional ones. These students, who often had become overly stressed and anxious at their previous school, quickly regained their confidence and enthusiasm and began producing exemplary work in a more child-centered, nurturing school environment.

Even with these testimonials, there was an undercurrent of doubt among some heads that parents, worried for their children in a uncertain and more competitive world, would continue to question progressive tenets that often elude quantitative measures. Nevertheless, one head asked prospective parents at an open house to write on a 3 by 5 card what outcome they most wanted for their children from school. The overwhelming answer was "self-confidence."

We ended the meeting by identifying how schools could better illustrate the benefits and outcomes of a progressive educaiton. Some of the ideas were as follows: alumni testimonials of how a progressive education provided a foundation for success in high school, college, and beyond; have students be more front and center in open houses, school assemblies, and other community events; include more videos on school websites capturing progressive classrooms in action; more clearly explain to parents that a progressive education is different from a traditional one and that, yes, there will be an inevitable transition to high school but, since their children have developed a sense of resilience and persistence, they will adjust quickly to new challenges.

The meeting included a number of heads from traditional schools who later confided to me about the "hollowness and one-dimensionality" of their schools. They did not feel their students were engaged at school and were not learning to think critically or creatively.

Like most of the heads in this meeting, I am optimistic that more and more parents will see the benefits of a progressive education in a competitive world.