Subscribe to our Blog
Evaluation IS part of education
Let’s face it. The goals of “education” are very complex. We all want our kids to graduate competent in literacy and numeracy, but we know that having a sense of place in terms of history, geography, politics, and the sciences as well as an appreciation of the arts are also parts of a truly “educated” person.
But our children gain these skills, knowledge and abilities to appreciate art as part of a process which can and should be continually monitored and improved. Also, their ability to obtain and benefit from this more broadly defined “education” is contingent upon their possessing adequate literacy and numeracy skills. And like any process, education has specific outcomes, some tangible, some not so, that it is trying to achieve. The education system owes it to our country, its taxpayers, and, most importantly, our children to monitor outcomes against expectations and continually refine the process.
No evaluation process can possibly capture everything that a student gains going through the schooling process, but, at a minimum, we must do everything we can to ensure that students are obtaining the literacy and numeracy skills that are the gateway to higher order skills and other subject areas (how can you solve problems or appreciate the majesty of the universe or the beauty of great literature if you can’t read and compute?)
Consequently, when I learned that that Elementary Teachers Union in Ontario was calling for a two-year moratorium on province-wide testing, I felt this needed to be challenged. My opinion column on this topic has just been published in the Mississauga News (http://www.mississauga.com/opinion/columns/article/870566—don-t-drop-eqao-tests) .
By the way, the fact that the elementary teachers’ union commissioned a poll to find out what their members thought about EQAO testing rather than, say, what they thought about whacky constructivist methodologies prevalent in Ontario classrooms, is quite telling.
“By the way, the fact that the elementary teachers’ union commissioned a poll to find out what their members thought about EQAO testing rather than, say, what they thought about wacky constructivist methodologies prevalent in Ontario classrooms, is quite telling.”
No, of course not. Why bother asking teachers about the wacky constructivist methodologies, because it might put a dent in the little marketing scheme, and the profits that come with remedial help to pass the EQAO testing. Not a bad scheme, when the taxpayers are funding this venture as well as the EQAO. Keeping lots of people employed, especially the educats who have moved to the more lucrative grounds to pad their education pensions.
EQAO by Pre4Success
http://www.prep4success.ca/index.html
At $12 a book - sounds pretty reasonable eh?
Until one goes to Summer Advantage. Selling JK to grade 7 activity books at $24 per book.
http://www.prepforsuccess.ca/default.cfm
Oh I almost forgot, do check out and press the button Who We Are. This particular group of people, are all for the wacky constructivist methods, if judging from the activity books. Too busy for my taste, but very telling on the actual material. I can think of better sites, and books, that would do a much better job, but of course they are not based on constructivist thinking.
Another money making from the folks of EQAO, is in language. “The language toolkit provides a 192 page complete study guide for the essential language skills required for success in secondary school and beyond. ” This kit comes at a cost of $23 dollars. http://www.prep4success.ca/toolkit/toolkithome.html
Is EQAO admitting that the writing skills of our secondary students are poor in the basics? Why bother having grammar and spelling lessons, in the lower grades, just tell the parents or the school to buy this book to help support EQAO and achievement of students.
Now, just in case one would think that it is all the EQAO’s fault, the Ontario Elementary Teachers’ Union have played their role here too. Looking at there statement regarding EQAO testing, it is misleading, and directs readers attention to the faults of testing, and the EQAO organization. It is misleading -
“Standardized Tests Don’t Ensure Accountability
Parents want to know how their children are doing at school. Do the EQAO tests help? Elementary teachers feel strongly that large-scale assessments such as the EQAO’s grade 3 and 6 tests do not give parents a true picture of their child’s progress. This is because:
•During the tests, students cannot interact with their teachers or other students. This is not a normal classroom experience.
•Multiple choice tests don’t accurately assess student knowledge, critical thinking ability, or many of the other skills and knowledge outlined in the provincial curriculum.
•The tests don’t assess the whole child or the whole curriculum.
•The tests provide only one assessment; good program decisions require many assessments.
•Test data do little to provide real help to students, parents, or schools. The test results are never shared with the student, only the marks.
•Resources used to create, administer, and mark the tests would be better spent supporting students and teachers in the classroom.
•School boards release the school scores to the media. This results in schools being ranked without important background information about factors contributing to the results.”
It is misleading when they state multiple choice, when in reality there is a written portion. It is the written portion of the test, that shows the true state of reading and writing in our schools. It is probably why EQAO decided to get into the business of publishing remedial work books, but the top brass of the teachers’ union, would rather have parents busy looking at EQAO testing, rather than looking at the curriculum and teaching methods. This can of worms must remain close at all costs, because it might mean less teachers working within the system and the government’s publishing business in remedial help would take a hit.