| Published
in the Des Moines Register, December 4, 2000 (reprinted courtesy
of the D.M. Register)
Imposing tests
on teachers would be costly error
By Thomas Switzer, Dean, College of Education, University of Northern
Iowa
There is great debate today about how best to guarantee that we have
quality teachers for Iowa’s schools. Two pay plans suggest that
substantially increasing the salary paid to Iowa teachers would both
increase the numbers and the quality of those who enter the field. While
increasing pay is certainly an important component in attracting and
retaining a quality teaching force, it is not, however, the entire answer.
Some states have implemented extensive testing of teachers as a condition
for entry into the profession in an attempt to improve the quality of
their teaching force. One of the pay plans for Iowa also calls for testing
of teachers as they progress through the pay grades. Such testing is,
however, extremely costly and ineffective as an indicator of teacher
quality. There are several reasons why this is true.
First, teachers are typically tested on low-level content with limited
emphasis on teaching skills. Of course, we want all teachers to be competent
in the content they teach. The tests, however, do not give us that confidence.
The way teachers must know their content to be effective, especially
at the high school level, is much more sophisticated. Effective teachers
know how to extract from the knowledge base of their discipline those
guiding principles that have explanatory power and are, therefore, most
worth teaching. Knowing that a teacher understands content at this level
of sophistication requires a much more elaborate form of assessment.
Second, since the typical form of testing does not give us the type
of information we need to determine a teacher’s in-depth knowledge,
it is not surprising then that there is no relationship between success
on teacher tests and classroom performance of teachers. A high score
on the test does not mean the person will be a good teacher. At a presentation
by perhaps the major testing company in the country, I asked the question,
"Is there a relationship between success on the teacher test and
classroom performance?" I was told that no testing company would
make that claim.
Still, with no proven relationship between test success and classroom
performance, the data are often reported as though there were some real
value. States report their test data with either great glee or great
disdain, depending on the results. The tests seem to give the public—and
especially politicians—a false sense of confidence that they have
done something to improve teacher quality when, in fact, they have done
nothing.
A 1998 bill passed by the U.S. Congress requires states that impose
testing as a condition of teacher licensure to report that data to the
U.S. Secretary of Education. The states are also required to rank their
teacher education programs from top to bottom based on those test scores,
a misuse of test data that in effect has no meaning. Iowa, as a non-testing
state, is working to avoid this requirement.
What is needed, of course, is a much more sophisticated form of assessment
that provides a level of confidence that a teacher can perform well
in the classroom. At the University of Northern Iowa we are working
on two initiatives to provide us with that confidence.
First is a project calling for teachers in training to present direct
samples (a portfolio of sorts) of their actual performance in their
classroom to a team of experts for evaluation. The National Board for
Professional Teaching Standards [NBPTS] uses a similar process to assess
the classroom performance of experienced teachers seeking national certification.
Support for these teachers working toward NBPTS certification is provided
by UNI. These two initiatives and their rigorous assessment are much
more likely to provide the assurance that we will have quality teachers
in the schools of Iowa.
It is likely that there will be pressures for the State of Iowa to impose
a test for teachers as a condition for initial licensure. In my opinion
that would be a costly mistake. Iowa has a reputation for high-quality
schools and for preparing excellent teachers. We should not fall prey
to the low-level testing being used in some states. I would hate to
see the tax money of Iowa wasted on such meaningless testing. We know
how to do it better in Iowa and should stick to our high standards.
We should use assessment programs for teachers that give us the confidence
that Iowa teachers can perform well in the classroom and that they can
enhance student learning.
|
