Testing: AZ vs NSW

FROM TEXT: “an IQ test is a snapshot, providing a static, framed view of a dynamic, ever-developing brain at work.” (p 325)


Fortunately, not all researchers agree that this is the only measure of a child's intelligence. Not only does Robert Sternberg see formal intelligence as being complimented by creativity and practical application, but Howard Gardner also believes that intelligence is the relationship of specific areas in which individuals may be more adept or talented. His theory of Multiple Intelligences includes everything from language and mathematical aptitude to a propensity towards relationships and spirituality. Particularly useful are his inclusion of learning strengths in the areas of kinesthetics and music which may create a more conducive learning environment for some children; setting up a battle field and acting out skirmishes of a given war or setting the names of states or multiplication tables to chants or tunes helps some children retain the information more easily because it involved more of their brain than just the left, analytical side.  It seems to reason then, that testing children exclusively through the use of pencil to paper tests only assesses, as the textbook stated, a portion of the child’s achievement and potential.

In Arizona, children begin standardized testing in the third grade. AIMS (Arizona’s Instrument to Measure Standards) was developed in responses to NCLB and tests students from grades 3-12 in the areas of Reading, Writing, Math and Science and is a requirement for high school graduation. (There are of course exceptions in the cases of some students with IEPs.) In terms of assessing children holistically these tests, in my opinion, do little more than a standard IQ. Students who learn or express learning non-linguistically are at a considerable disadvantage. I suppose the theory may be that if children are tested on a regular basis they will eventually become adept at this form of evaluation so that by the time they reach the critical stage (sophomore year in high school) they will perform more confidently; who knows?  I do wish that I could figure out how to conduct these mandatory exams in such a way that provides each student the opportunity to excel in a way that is most proficient for him/her.

I spoke to my friend, Terri, regarding her family’s experiences with education in Australia a few years ago when her husband was transferred down under for a year. The cultural differences were vast for the entire family, but especially for their two children (then 1^st and 5^th grades). In first grade, student’s social/emotional development took precedence over academic achievement because if a child isn’t socially or emotionally ready to cope with the demands of formal education and peers they will not be ready to learn content information. At parent/teacher conferences considerable time was spent discussing the children’s home life and their transition into a new culture with no focus on learning gaps or homework.  When Terri specifically asked about her son’s homework (5^th grade) the teacher seemed surprised and offered to give him some if Terri insisted. The expectation was that students give 110% when they are at school and then go home and play – since play and physical activity are just as important as academic achievement. In fact, physical education is an integral part of the school day; when the body is in motion it is preparing the brain for learning. Sports are valued as opportunities to gain social competence: cooperation, relationships, and emotions such as disappointment. Even family vacations and travel are viewed as valuable educational opportunities instead of inconveniently planned absences.

Soon I hope to be posting a copy of the children’s report cards which illustrate the subjectivity of their evaluations. Students are graded on the teacher’s perception of their proficiency and well roundedness. Children are seen as holistic individuals with varying skills. There are few formal tests, instead comprehension is checked orally and children progress as they become proficient at a task. Unfortunately, this usually results in a form of tracking where students fall into a given range of ability and seldom work their way up.

Another interesting aspect of Australian education is the modular academic focus. Teachers concentrate on a specific content area throughout the year in order to build a thorough understanding of it before moving on instead of the choppy schedule seen in US elementary schools. Reading and writing are the primary focus in the first grade followed by mastery of other subjects such as Science, History and Math in subsequent years. Don’t misunderstand, there are activities that prepare students for the next unit, they are simply not the primary objective. Incremental counting drills (counting by 2, 4, 5, 7, etc…) prepare students for higher math skills in later grades.

Similar to AIMS, the ICAS (International Competitions and Assessments for Schools) is a pen/paper test developed by the University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. Students are also tested beginning in the 3^rd year but the testing subjects include Computers Skills along with Mathematics, English (Reading), Spelling, Writing, and Science.  In viewing the practice tests, I noticed that test questions for 3^rd grade differed primarily in the area of Math where children in Arizona are expected to have a firm understanding of fractions while children in Australia were evaluated on their counting, and recognition of geometrical objects. Of course other content areas differed as well, but the primary difference is the purpose of their testing which is to identify students learning strengths and weaknesses in order to assist their learning. Students who perform well are also eligible to receive medals of distinction and certificates instead of waiting for years in hopes of receiving a diploma.

What is the answer? I’m not sure. Children certainly need to be assessed in order to evaluate their individual needs as well as abilities, but how to do it in such a way that includes the entire child’s knowledge bank is beyond me. Perhaps at some point there will be a way to differentiate testing sufficiently that students can demonstrate their learning in more practical ways: in ways that make sense to them. Perhaps one day children can be valued for their individual learning styles and not seen just as a series of bubbles filled in on a form. Perhaps… some day…