This article is the second of three parts on the FCAT Program in Florida. In Part I, the author explores educational reforms prior to the introduction of FCAT; next, he delves into the perceived problems of FCAT, including competency testing and school drop out rates. Part III concludes with some suggestions for overcoming the “FCAT problem.”
So What Are the Believed Problems?
Competency Testing and School Dropouts – One of Several Problems
An interesting aspect I didn’t see discussed often, but found during my research is the possibility of the test causing a higher rate of dropouts. According to a white paper published way back in 1996 by Bryan W. Griffin of Georgia Southern University and Mark H Heidorn of the Florida Department of Education called “An Examination of the Relationship Between Minimum Competency Test Performance and Dropping Out of High School” (http://coe.georgiasouthern.edu/foundations/bwgriffin/research/bg_mct.htm) there are concerns about the test contributing to the dropout rate. In their paper they made it clear the correlation was difficult to prove, but the link was probably very valid. Their results were very surprising and turned some of the conventional thinking on its ear.
The paper’s first conclusion stated, “Numerous researchers have argued that competency tests are likely to have adverse affects on academically at-risk and minority students (Archer & Dresden, 1987; Kreitzer, Madaus, & Haney, 1989; McDill, Natriello, & Pallas, 1987). The results of this study do not support these hypotheses. First, there was no statistically significant difference in dropout rates between low achieving students who passed and failed the MCT[Minimum Competency Test]. While academically disadvantaged students are more likely to leave school overall, it did not appear that MCT performance provided any additional impetus to drop out for these students.”
While that would seem a given, in that students that have academic problems probably hate school and leave on their own, part of the study seemingly proved that theory.
The second discovery disproved a long held theory. There didn’t appear to be any differences in the dropout rate and race. “Second, there appears to be a gap in the predicted dropout rate between those who passed and failed the MCT for students with better academic records. But this gap, denoted by the RR [Risk Ratio] did not differ between Blacks, Whites, and Hispanics. In short, these data did not support the notion that minority students are adversely affected, in terms of dropping out, by the MCT in a manner that is different from Whites.”
Then came their bomb.
“Lastly, there does appear to be some relationship between MCT performance and dropping out of school. While MCT performance is not the strongest predictor of dropping out, competency testing does appear to play a minor role in students’ decisions to leave school. Apparently it is those students one would least expect to be affected by competency test performance who suffer the most from MCT failure — students with strong academic records. This relationship may be partially explained by the perceived stigma attached to MCT failure. Following a competency test failure, students may experience a substantial drop in self-esteem, or they may feel embarrassed in front of their peers. And such experiences might be especially acute for students with a proven record of academic success. As a result, failure on a competency test may also foster a sense of alienation, and as LeCompte and Dworkin (1991) contend, alienation may ultimately lead to the abandonment of school for these students.”
They didn’t infer this was set in stone but were clear how things appeared from their study. Students took the test seriously for the most part and there was a lot of pressure to succeed. When they couldn’t or wouldn’t, they become outcasts and self – deprecating people. Rather than face their peers, they drop out and refuse to face the ridicule. Let’s face it, children can be cruel.
The common title attached to this type of testing is known as “High Stakes Testing”, making clear this type of testing is a type of all or nothing situation. Students often find themselves under considerable pressure to succeed, and if they don’t their entire lives can be displaced.
The study listed above is but one test, conducted fourteen years ago. The problem has not been let go, however and numerous studies have been completed since then. In February of 2005 Judith Lohman a chief analyst with the state education department in Connecticut compiled a list of studies about the subject of high stakes testing and dropout rates (http://www.cen.ct.gov/cen/Search/Search.asp?col=allconn&ht=0&qp=&qs=&qc=&pw=100%25&la=en&charset=iso-8859-1&si=0&fs=&qt=grades&ex=&rq=0&oq=&ws=0&qm=0&ql=&st=391&nh=10&lk=1&rf=0). Nine studies were cited and the overall answer was one of ambiguity. They all basically said the same thing. Everyone believes there is the dropout connection but there’s just not enough data to seriously prove it. Overall however, it sure seems to be a problem among a number of others we all already are aware of, such as the quality of the test, the money it costs, and the new one, getting accurate results.
Do Teachers “Teach the Test?”
Florida’s Department of Education’s fact or myth page addresses the question by deflecting the meaning of the question. They infer teachers teaching the test are giving away the answers but that’s not how most people understand the statement. Teachers teaching the test are primarily spending their time teaching the subjects and covering the material on the test. I suppose in some ways that’s giving the students the answers, but that’s not like saying, ‘this is a question on the test and here’s the answer.’ It simply means a lot of time is expended on teaching the test material. The last statement of their point says, “Students will be well prepared for the FCAT if teachers provide quality instruction in the subject matter they ordinarily teach.” That is a very telling statement and a very true one. The problem, according to many, is there’s just not enough time to teach what they ordinarily teach. They have to spend too much time teaching the testing material, and again, according to many, this limits greatly a rounded education.
Rather than teaching the test, using the test as guide and including the information in the curriculum will provide a well rounded and complete education for our children. But there are other factors to consider in “teaching the test” and they aren’t negative ones.
Jay P. Greene and Marcus Winters, both intellectuals with the Manhattan Institution for Policy Research, cited some very interesting points that I believe still hold true. Jay P. Greene is a senior fellow with some serious credentials, and Marcus Winters is a senior researcher also capable of sporting some pretty lofty educational wisdom.
Their research was started in an effort to see just what was going on in Florida schools. Even back in 2003 there was deep concern about teachers teaching the test. The questions of a broader education missing due to the perceived narrowness of the test curriculum, was a question then as it is now.
They took the Stanford Achievement Test, also known as the SAT – 9 or SAT – 10, depending on the series, studying its results and the test overall. In this case Florida used a SAT – 9. Both tests are respected throughout the intellectual and educational community. The difference between the SAT – 9 and the FCAT is the SAT – 9 has never been used for any nature of accountability, which also means it isn’t considered to be a high stakes test. Additionally, the teachers have no reason to teach the test. With that in mind the students aren’t under pressure and the test has no relationship to a school’s performance rating.
One could presume from that the SAT – 9 scores, showing great learning results would be higher, but that was not the case. With 1 being identical results, they found the correlation to be extremely close between the two tests, at .96. Year-to-year gains registered a .71.
Dr. Greene stated, “These results tell us that to whatever extent it has occurred, teaching to the FCAT has contributed to student performance on broader measures of student learning, such as the SAT-9, where there were no incentives to teach to that test.
“Our findings suggest that if Florida teachers are focusing exclusively on FCAT material, as some claim, then in doing so, they are teaching skills that are generally useful rather than useful only to pass a single standardized test. By forcing teachers to alter their curricula and teaching techniques in order to get their students to pass the FCAT, Florida has forced them to better prepare their students for life outside the classroom walls. The evidence suggests that the FCAT has effectively communicated to teachers and schools what general knowledge they must teach and provided them with incentives to ensure that students acquire that knowledge.”
So with the SAT – 9 being a Chevrolet, and the FCAT being a Ford, it would appear they are pretty equal grey vehicles and the choice is simply a matter of taste. They are both functional, it would seem, and so presumably it comes down to a matter of educational budget, the quality of the physical school structure’s comfort, etc., and the ability of the teacher. All things being equal, which they aren’t, we in Florida have a nice measurement vehicle, right? That may be the case, but as with anything this big and controversial, there are still factors to be considered.
Is Teacher Freedom a Problem?
One of the complaints heard has been the state has no right to tell teachers what to teach. I find that a bit silly. Of course they do, whether what they are requiring is right or wrong. Teachers are employees, and the state is the boss. It’s that simple. They don’t tell them how to do it, and that’s where teaching really comes to bear. A good teacher is a good teacher and a bad one is a bad one, and there are a lot of median instructors out there. Teachers teaching with heart and desire teach better than those with just a modicum of concern. Students know it, parents see it, and administrators grade on it, with or without the FCAT. To feel otherwise is to say everyone in the educational complex is an idiot, and that is categorically wrong.
Is It the Teacher’s Fault?
I dare say almost all of our educators care about their students and if nothing else, their jobs, at minimum, but I believe more in the former than the latter. These people don’t wake up one day and say to themselves, ‘I think I want a job where I am responsible for young brains and how those people acquit themselves they will enter society, and I want to be paid terribly for it.’ These people care and want to contribute. They go through college and enter a life of stress and work level equivalent, in my eye, to that of an air traffic controller. Some will disagree, but think of this…from the start of their careers until the end they are responsible for thousands of lives. Maybe not in the strict sense of death, but living a life unfulfilled due to a bad education, is a sense of being the walking dead in my thoughts. I have been very fortunate and very blessed in my life so I don’t know that feeling, but I am smart enough and sensitive enough to see it all around me. Some brought it on themselves, but there are others, I have to believe, are educational system victims, whether we want to believe it or not.
Don’t get me wrong, America is known for our individual Phoenixes that have risen from the ashes of their struggling, sometimes overwhelmingly sad lives, and made good. Almost to a person, anyone can do what they have to in order to rise above the pain of everyday life and become whatever they desire to be. What if they aren’t taught that? What if they don’t believe in themselves because the educational system never instilled that in them?
We think of schools in many cases as sterile systems spitting out students after giving them an overpowering knowledge inoculation. Suddenly, after twelve years they miraculously step into the bright, sunshiny world with knowledge that will work as an antibody against the perils of this world. Who do you think got these children to this point? Certainly a good parent will be a great assist, but the bulk of the heavy lifting falls on the shoulders of these dedicated, wonderful, often brilliant people on the other side of that apple laden desk.
The Golden Rule – He Who Has The Gold Rules
So again, theorizing all things are equal, and we have not only good teachers and educational leaders, and finally a comfortable cruising vehicle as a means for appraising students, teachers, and schools, what’s left? Funding.
Things are tough all over as the old saying goes, and that’s a problem here in Florida. It wasn’t supposed to be in the area of education, however, as per the pro – lottery bunch. I have nothing against the lottery, or gambling, as long as people do it responsibly, which some people don’t, but we were led to believe back in the early nineties that the lottery would be the end – all, be – all for saving our educational system. As those millions of dollars rapidly piled up, millions of dollars were taken from the budget, so the song remained the same. The dirge rang out from Tallahassee in the form of our choir of senators and representatives. Money is tight, money is tight, so taking educational funds just seems right. All that lottery money is just sitting right there, so let’s take some and use it over here! It all made sense to them, and it angered the rest of us, although few did or said anything to try and make it right, admittedly, including myself.
Now we are ranked thirty-first, or there about depending on the study you read, in all the states on money spent per student. According to the Center for Applied Economic Development in Montana thirty-first is our average on several educational fronts. The institute funded the study, but it fits right in with dozens of other studies, ranking Florida in the low thirties. We remain in all the studies on the south side of the funding equator.
The reason I chose this study is the way they did it and the additional information provided by this study. From the beginning they quantify the term “quality” as used in the study.
In the social sciences, a term like “quality” is referred to as a hypothetical construct. “Quality” is not something that can be measured like the length of a table or the weight of a car. “Quality” must be inferred from other measurements that are related to what people generally mean by “quality”.
“Because of the inference of relationships, different measurements of “quality” can be created which reflect a number of different viewpoints, including those that are political. Therefore, it is imperative when judging the results of these studies to know how “quality” was defined in terms of how it was measured.”
I like that. I like how they brought the term political into the fray. It is political. I like how they also measured quality. They used six factors – teacher quality, education input, education output, education social impact, and educational efficiency.
For teacher quality they looked at the factors of how the state punished and rewarded teachers AND administrators, conducted checks on their backgrounds, and how much power was given for hiring and firing.
On the educational front they used four measurements. Number one was teacher salaries. Money gets quality teachers, let’s face it head on. Next they looked at how many students were in the classroom. Finally they looked at education cost per student, and the Thomas Fordham results.
The last measurement comes from the Thomas Fordham Institute, who assists in providing a national standard for educational review. They describe themselves as “a private foundation that supports research, publications, and action projects in elementary/secondary education reform at the national level…”
In the area of education output they used National Assessment of Educational Process (NAEP) tests on reading and math, and the Mean American College Testing (ACT) score for the state overall. Those are pretty straight forward but it is important to note they used an assessment test to figure out the quality level of education in the U.S.
Education social impact is one of the most important, yet dynamic, factors in figuring quality. This is another reason I cited this study. I feel they approached this in a very intelligent manner. They looked at the neighborhood in general considering per capita income, the percent of people with college degrees, and (this is intriguing but someone was thinking) the number of books checked out of the libraries on a per capita basis.
Finally they used educational efficiency. The institute states “This measurement is basically the “bang-per-buck” of education. It is a measurement that businesses would use if they were measuring efficiency. It was calculated by using the standardized average of the cost per student per unit measured output.”
They looked at costs per student above and below the 4th grade level, and the overall costs in general.
All of those factors are in some way relatively easy to figure. They are as unambiguous, as they are varied from state to state, but they are real honest factors and represent a well thought out version of evaluation. They weren’t quite through, however. They started looking as some other social factors. This is where the money really comes in.
Median family income of an area is related to all of the factors they considered. They are directly connected and we can attribute success of an educational system to the money available. All to often we use that as the only attribute and it is misleading in some ways, but a solid factor of how well the system works. It is misleading because there isn’t a direct correlation of what goes comes out of our schools. There is always the teacher variable.
This is shown by the fact, as the study states, “there is, however, no relationship between the educational inputs and educational outputs. This conclusion is not counterintuitive. There is, in fact, almost a negative correlation between the amount of money spent historically on education in America and almost any measure of achievement (except perhaps, psychosocial benefits).” That’s pretty intuitive.
They further state, “There is also no significant relationship between educational efficiency and educational output. This is not unexpected since efficiency is a function of monetary input. There is a strong relationship between education efficiency and education’s social impact. This finding is, however, not related to monetary input but to population density. States with lower population density generally do better with the resources they have.”
Florida is a state of many retirees, people that live off the tourist industry, and a large farming population. There’s a fair technological component but we aren’t rich, almost as a rule. This limits the money we can put into education, so we have to use it wisely and efficiently. The best way is not necessarily limiting our view of the system based on a single test.
