Fewer tests to $ave money
Here’s a cost-cutting strategy many students will love: Marietta school leaders are considering giving fewer tests.
School leaders say they can save $42,000 next year if they cut back on how many grades take the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills. Now all students take the standardized test, but the district proposes giving it in just grades two, four and seven.
This isn’t the only cut the district is considering. They’re planning to slash jobs, freeze salaries and possibly furlough employees to make up an anticipated shortfall of at least $4 million.
(Who will get furloughed is still being determined. The superintendent says she wants to avoid taking days away from teachers.)
What do you think of schools cutting back on testing to save money? Which tests could they get rid of?
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
60 comments Add your comment
Reality 2
March 26th, 2009
10:39 pm
ScienceTeacher,
Sorry, the grading was done in a different document produced by the same foundation titled State of State Standards. However, the report you cited also uses the data from the 2005-06 school year. I believe that was the very first year that the new math standards were implemented in Grade 6, and all other grades were still under the old standards.
So, again, whatever that report says about the GA math standards, it is no longer relevant – except for Grades 10-12 for now.
ScienceTeacher671
March 27th, 2009
4:54 pm
Reality 2, we’re discussing apples and oranges here. The State of the State Standards discusses the curriculum – the Georgia Performance Standards. The Accountability Illusion discusses the standardized testing used to judge how well the standards have been taught – and says in no uncertain terms that Georgia’s cut scores are too low, as does the USDOE report that compared Georgia test scores with NAEP scores.
We could have the world’s highest standards, but if a student can pass the Georgia tests without mastering the standards, what’s the point?
My 9th grade students who made the minimum passing score on the 8th grade math CRCT were working at a grade equivalent level of 4th grade in math according to their ITBS scores.
The Fordham Institute also gives the Georgia Science standards a grade of “B”, but a student can “pass” the 9th grade physical science EOCT by getting 45% of the answers correct. Do you think that indicates mastery of the subject matter?
Reality 2
March 27th, 2009
8:53 pm
Science Teacher,
ITBS (and NAEP) and CRCT are definitely apples and oranges – we can’t really replace one with the other. Someone may score 80 percentile on the ITBS, but it may not mean that s/he has mastered the state standards. If we are using a test to hold schools and teachers accountable for teaching the state standards, then we should be using the CRCT. Where to set the cut scores is also a totally different issue. You can have a perfectly good assessment instrument, but the cut scores may be set at inappropriate levels.
ScienceTeacher671
March 28th, 2009
9:26 am
Reality 2, I do understand the difference between criterion-referenced and norm-referenced tests, and it is an important difference.
My point is that the CRCTs are currently useless in determining whether or not state standards have been taught, as the cut scores are set so low. Since they don’t currently do what they are designed/purported to do, they are a waste of time and money. Yes, the problem could conceivably be easily solved by changing the cut scores, but politically that would be a huge problem as many more students would fail the tests.
Further, if our state standards are above average in reading and math, students who meet those standards should be performing above average on national assessments, not several years below grade level.
Reality 2
March 28th, 2009
3:48 pm
Quite frankly, I think they are both waste of time. However, from a policy (and perhaps educational) perspective, the CRCT is more important because we can only hold teachers accountable only for helping students master what the state standards require.
“Grade level” scores are very misleading because a 7th grader scoring “4th grade” doesn’t mean her/his reading is at the 4th grade level. They are just simply another way of labeling relative scores for the entire 7th graders used to normalize the scores.
ScienceTeacher671
March 29th, 2009
6:18 pm
Again, since the CRCT cut scores are set so low, passing it does not indicate mastery of anything.
Yes, grade level scores are relative things, but again, if our standards are set appropriately and our students are mastering those standards, their performance should not be so far below average.
ScienceTeacher671
March 30th, 2009
6:19 am
Again, our current CRCTs don’t test mastery, and our students are well below average on national tests.
Reality2
March 30th, 2009
12:22 pm
ScienceTeacher,
If the problem is the cut scores, you can’t say that the CRCT does not test/indicate mastery. They may – if students score 80% on the CRCT, that might be a reasonable indication of their mastery of the particular standards.
Whether or not a test measures mastery has nothing to do with how the test scores are used, i.e., setting up cut scores to determine who will be promoted and who will not.
ScienceTeacher671
March 30th, 2009
5:33 pm
Okay, Reality2, I’ll agree that the CRCT could conceivably be used to test mastery of the GPS.
However, in my experience, a student who merely “meets expectations” probably hasn’t actually mastered the relevant standards, while many of the students who “exceed expectations” probably have only minimally met the standards for that subject and grade level.
Sarah
April 1st, 2009
8:26 am
Wow! I think this is a great idea. I wish our system would cut back on the ITBS.