I was directed on Twitter this weekend to a though provoking article in the Washington Post entitled “Teacher: Data, My New Dirty Word”.
You can find the article here.
This article resonated with me not because I am against gathering data or letting that data inform actions. If we want students to accomplish things, we need to find out how and why they are doing so. Many teachers and schools have for too long thrown instruction at the wall, assuming it was sticking. Poor results on classroom exams were explained by student laziness or lack of ability, and not as information to change the type or quality instruction. The power of technological tools to gather and analyze data has been under-utilized, ignoring the information that is available. Data driven instruction is an effective approach to improving learning for all students.
But, as most pendulums do, I fear that we are moving too far to the other direction. Data has evolved from being a tool and has become a deity. In an effort to bring clarity to school evaluation, politicians, media, and others have sought simplicity. Thus test scores on standardized exams became not information for a school, but that school’s very identity.
I have three main concerns with this:
- Standardized test results are complex. I have sat in workshops for hours while testing company representatives explain the interpretation of results. This is an important part of the testing process; however, I know that most who view results cannot help but understand and compare results as, “big numbers good, small numbers bad.” I know I have this gut reaction to scores (which I try to suppress), and I don’t see anyone in the public sector voicing similar cautions (short of a cursory, clearly to be ignored, disclaimer).
- Teaching for test scores perverts the broader educational program of the school. It is maddening to me that the SAT has engendered a cottage industry of test-prep companies. These companies distill key ideas and strategies of the test to a mini-course that can have more impact on results than actual classroom instruction. Test-result based schools can suffer from the same myopia. Just as SAT courses really don’t teach anything but how to improve scores on a test on a single Saturday, so schools develop students who are proficient test takers. Which leads to my third concern.
- I have not yet found a convincing argument that taking high stakes standardized exams is an important life skill…only a school skill. In my day to day experiences, I am often surprised how little I draw from the data I once was able to produce with a #2 pencil and how much I draw from other classroom experiences and assignments. So much of the professional world is open book and untimed. Are we raising a generation of well-practiced unicyclists?
In these arguments I don’t want my initial point lost. We do need to gather, analyze, and allow out programs and instruction to be formed by data. However this is part of the education process, and not a substitute for it.