June 3, 2007 - The media campaign against standardized testing for high school graduation in Texas continues in the Dallas Morning News. "Analysis shows TAKS cheating rampant" is the first of three parts.
Part Two: At TEA, years of inquiry, few concrete results
Part Three: Common questions about analyzing tests for cheating
They base much of their opinion on an analysis by George Wesolowsky, a professor at McMaster University in Canada who studies cheating on multiple-choice tests like the TAKS. He is quoted as saying, "The evidence of substantial cheating is beyond any reasonable doubt."
Another Canadian, David Harpp, a professor at Montreal's McGill University who studies cheating and reviewed the analysis was also quoted. ""What we have here in many of the schools, particularly charter schools, is rampant cheating involving many students."
Both Canadian academics based their opinions on "statistical analysis." The Texas Education Agency (TEA), according to the Dallas Morning News, has cleared 98 percent of the schools in its recent round of investigations, in most cases because school officials did not volunteer knowledge of improprieties. Many of those schools were found to have widespread cheating in The News' analysis.
The newspaper also depended upon input from Caveon, a test security firm. Caveon markets their services of detecting, correcting, and preventing test fraud. As part of that they provide, in "conjunction with your in-house or contracted legal team, prepare basic admonitions; file and litigate suits." [No explanation, but the logical question is who is being sued?]
There are some obvious questions that come to mind.
If there is such widespread cheating as alleged, is Texas unique in the number of students who cheat? If there is widespread cheating and the problem is as big as they allege, doesn't it call for the collusion of test examiners? The example of 4-5 students having a cluster of answers would suggest actual conferences during test taking. Are monitors lax or deliberately sabotaging the tests?
Some schools, according to the article, have new rules about open doors during testing and roving monitors. This, again, indicates that test cheating is assisted by test monitors - teachers.
The stakes are high for schools who are found academically failing, not only for the student, but job security for teachers and administrators. There are substantial bonuses for schools and personnel for higher scores. And substantial penalities for failing, especially for charter schools.
But the biggest unaddressed question is, if students are unable or unwilling to pass 11th grade examinations, how can they expect to pass more rigorous examinations at the college level?
And why aren't monitors who proctor exams disciplined for abetting cheating?
New York state has had standardized testing in the form of Regents Examinations for decades. It is not now, nor ever has been, the political football that standardized testing is in Texas and other states that resist verification that the student actually learned something.
If a school or a teacher was found to have unacceptably high rates of failure on the Regents exams, it was assumed that the teacher wasn't following curriculum. It was assumed that the school was lax. Not that the exam was flawed. Not that the Regents were out of touch. Not that the students were liars and cheats. The monitor was fired and standards were established.
The debate should not be whether to abandon the exams, but who to blame? Those who write the tests or those who conduct them?
That last just never seems to occur to the media.
No comments:
Post a Comment