Testing… a teachable moment
TESTING can provide some teachable moments.
Imagine. The desks are in rows. One child per desk or sitting alternately on opposite sides. Different colored tests. “No talking,” written on the board. Adults think kids cheat is the message.
And then one student, child, asks something along the lines of I-don’t-get-this-can-you-help-me? The answer? Well, in the traditional classroom it’ll be something along the lines of No-this-is-a-test.
Let’s look at this.
If the purpose of a test is to find out if a student, child, understands an idea… then the question I-don’t-get-this-can-you-help-me? seems to provide the answer with little doubt. Incontrovertible. So, why the No? In any other lesson the same question from the same student would be seized upon, or, one would hope.
Imagine you’re the hapless student. You don’t understand, you ask for help and the teacher says No. You then have to sit there, in silence unable to do the natural thing — ask your neighbor if they can help. Children are hard-wired to talk, ask questions, communicate. That’s how it works in the real adult world too. But not in a test. Ask your neighbor, and you’re a cheat. So much for teaching co-operation, social skills and collaboration.
As the student sits there, confused as well as stuck, what does that do for their self-esteem?
Personally, I agree with the research that is conclusive — testing reveals little about a child’s knowledge and mostly does harm to the learning process. But the US education system seems wedded to testing and not to the conclusions of contemporary research data. And in my school it’s on the up-and-up. Testing is becoming an obsesssion.
Testing is what teachers talk about daily — planning the test, reviewing for the test, putting off the test and then, heads wagging in disbelief, incomprehension as to the results… they-just-don’t-get-it.
Apart from abandoning testing, is there an alternative that meets the needs of those who believe in testing and, more importantly, the confused child who needs help?
This is what I tried this week.
I took the departmentally-agreed questions and buried them inside three half-page assignments each on different colored paper. The green sheet with the word question had two other word questions — not identical questions or the same question with the numbers changed, but questions around the same idea.
The other calculation test questions on the pink and blue sheets were buried in groups of similar questions exploring much the same ideas.
Students were told to bring their working and their answers to me as they completed each question or group of questions. OK, a bit of queue formed, but I was able quickly to spot what was going on with each student and give instant feedback accordingly.
I was also able to build up a list of common mistakes, misconceptions and approaches. I was able to mark some answers to share with colleageues later. I was also able to note the inadequacies of our commonly-decided questions, the ambiguous wording, how students interpreted our questions.
The only questions on which students received no immediate feedback were the magic test questions. Those I just noted, right or wrong. No student noticed as we discussed the surrounding questions.
I didn’t need to shift the desks into rows. There was no big sign saying No Talking. The students go to socialize. Each got individual and immediate feedback without having to ask for it. I got a detailed formative assessment as to the thinking, approach and understanding of each student to guide the next lesson. No one risked being accused of cheating.
And whoever is interested in the test statistics got what they need too.
Testing with teachable moments. Everybody happy.
Entry filed under: Assessment + Grading, Testing, Thoughts from the classroom, What's on the PiFactory blog.... Tags: assessment for learning, classroom practice, descriptive feedback, formative assessment, grades, grading, math, Pedagogy, research, test nerves, Testing, tests.