http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/31/education/31charleston.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

Quote :

"After testing in 2007, the state noticed an unusually high number of erasure marks — as many as seven per child — with the erasures becoming correct answers. “That became a concern, because the likelihood of that happening is very small,” said Ms. Rose, the district official, noting that the average was around one such mark. This year, after the tests were closely monitored, the scores plummeted. Suddenly, 44.4 percent of third graders taking the state science test met the state standard, compared with 84.6 percent in 2007. Many teachers said afterward that the presence of the auditors themselves — “cold and very distant,” as one put it — negatively influenced the scores. "

Seems like she played an entire town. Other possibilities are it was a small group of teachers or another aid that had access to the tests who changed the answers.

My opinion is that the awards she received while at the school should be taken away with no further action taken unless more proof emerges (unlikely at this late time).

10/31/2008 1:19:03 PM

Proof why NCLB sucks.

10/31/2008 1:20:12 PM

Best part is that she now has some nice job somewhere else

10/31/2008 1:22:13 PM

I'm positive that this is happening all over the place. I'm actually surprised it made news

Teachers are being told that if 100% of their kids aren't getting an 80% or above on fairly difficult tests, the teachers will lose their jobs. Essentially, "do the impossible by 2014, or you're fired."

And somehow it's surprising that some teachers cheat? I'm certainly not justifying it, but really:

Quote :

"Proof why NCLB sucks"

10/31/2008 2:11:25 PM

Tests and grading suck. They are games, so it's not surprising folks treat them that way.

10/31/2008 2:33:33 PM

NCLB certainly is an idiotic policy, and almost certainly provides negative incentives such as the above.

In light of this though, what do people propose as an alternative performance/accountability measure? Because it seems like this problem will be endemic to any policy that tries to use standardized testing as a metric of performance and implements policies contingent upon such metrics.

In other words, how do we structure the system to know "is our children learning?"

10/31/2008 2:51:26 PM

I'm not opposed to state-wide or even nation-wide standards. I'm not even opposed to standards that rely on tests.

It's the notion that all the children must take the -same- test and all the children must pass that's ludicrous.

I'd suggest that we need to accept that tough standards necessarily lead to lower passing rates-- at least temporarily. Trying to achieve both high standards and low failure rates simultaneously promotes a race to the bottom that would be comical if I weren't living it day by day. Instead of writing critical thinking essays, they're drawing pictures to help them memorize vocabulary. Instead of teaching them responsibility, we're coddling them. Whatever it takes to get students to bubble in the right answers at the end of the year.

I also think that we need to get over the ridiculous idea that -all- students should get a college prep curriculum. It's completely unrealistic, and it makes school entirely irrelevant for students not planning on attending college. We need many tracks, with many different standards.

10/31/2008 3:16:23 PM

How about letting parents decide which schools they want their children going to?

10/31/2008 3:26:09 PM

^^Ok. Sounds reasonable.

I ask this question not to come off as contentious, but because it seems like the problems of testing seem particularly endemic - any system which requires all students to take a standardized test to assess learning and has direct policy consequences for the outcomes of those tests will promote negative incentives.

So, I think you've hit upon the right idea - that the current testing regime lies in the assumption that every student should be being prepared for a university education. Not every student desire (or capability). But there should be viable education pathways available to them.

Unfortunately, as much as I agree with you that this is a reasonable assertion, politically this seems like a non-starter at the moment. People don't like hearing that not every student should actually be put on a college-prep track (regardless of whether or not other tracks are geared toward gainful, skilled employment) - it sounds "elitist."

[Edited on October 31, 2008 at 3:29 PM. Reason : ^^]

10/31/2008 3:28:59 PM

Quote :

"People don't like hearing that not every student should actually be put on a college-prep track (regardless of whether or not other tracks are geared toward gainful, skilled employment) - it sounds "elitist.""

It certainly doesn't give people warm fuzzy feelings, but I think it'll be easy to sell.

A) Starting this year, all students taking Civics in NC will have to repeat the class if they don't score an 82% or higher on the EOC. If the current performance trend holds, this means that roughly half of all NC sophomores will have to repeat the class. After a couple of years of this BS, I think many voting parents will have a change of heart.

This is the case with US History, Biology, English II, and Algebra as well.

B) Just sell the multi-tracked as "better preparing our youth for the future." Emphasize the state's wonderful new biotech, nursing, and IT tracks, and slip the electrician, plumbing, and mechanic tracks in while no one's looking.

[Edited on October 31, 2008 at 3:42 PM. Reason : ]

10/31/2008 3:40:57 PM

All the children are above average.

10/31/2008 3:45:31 PM

Quote :

"All the children are above average."

and going to college!

10/31/2008 4:50:19 PM

as I heard this story, the testing in 2007 involved 15 minute breaks in the testing for the students to go to the bathroom and stuff. And then they are surprised when the students come back and erase answers? Durrr

11/2/2008 3:32:14 PM

11/2/2008 3:49:13 PM

Quote :

"aaronburro: as I heard this story, the testing in 2007 involved 15 minute breaks in the testing for the students to go to the bathroom and stuff. And then they are surprised when the students come back and erase answers? Durrr"

It seems more likely that someone changed the answers for them.

I mean, I doubt these kids are organized/disciplined enough to pull off such a large-scale cheating operation.

11/2/2008 3:58:33 PM

Quote :

" I mean, I doubt these kids are organized/disciplined enough to pull off such a large-scale cheating operation."

While I don't disagree with you on this case, you'd be surprised at the lengths students go to to cheat and the organization and planning involved.

11/2/2008 4:08:15 PM

seriously, Bridget, how hard is it to go up to your friend during the break and say "hey, what did you put on this question?" There's no organization necessary, especially when the kids know beforehand that they will get that 15 minute break! come on. What seems more likely: kids cheating, or teachers changing answers and risking their entire CAREER?

11/2/2008 5:46:20 PM

^^I totally feel you. Sort of that classic, "If you put half as much effort into studying as you do cheating..."

^Dude, we're talking about the difference between 80 percent of the kids passing and 40 percent passing. In order to achieve that difference, those bathrooms must have been packed, and all the kids must have miraculously been able to memorize long series of lettter combinations.

I mean, when you ask a kid "What's two times 8?" And he says, "Eighty-eight." I don't see that same kid being able to go into a bathroom for fifteen minutes and come out, saying, "Okay, I think I got one through four right. Five through seven were A, C, A. Eight was contested--Charles said it was B and Henry thinks it's C. I guess I'll circle C. I got number 9. Ten, we couldn't figure out. I can't remember what I put for 11 so I'll have to check and make sure I had B. I think I got twelve through nineteen, but just in case, they were ABBCBCA, I'll have to use a memory device for that...let's see Always Buy Black Cherries Before Canned Acorns. Always Buy Black Cherries Before Canned Acorns. Always Buy Black Cherries Before Canned Acorns..."

I just don't see forty percent of any population of people being able to pull that off.

I guess what I'm saying is that I would attribute the disparity in scores to the "cold, distant" presence of the auditors before I would consider the idea that these kids alone pulled off some massive cheating scheme that would require levels of planning and discipline that most adults don't have.

[Edited on November 2, 2008 at 6:22 PM. Reason : sss]

11/2/2008 6:04:44 PM

^^ I'd give your idea a little more credence if the answers weren't all changed to right answers.

Quote :

"Starting this year, all students taking Civics in NC will have to repeat the class if they don't score an 82% or higher on the EOC. If the current performance trend holds, this means that roughly half of all NC sophomores will have to repeat the class. After a couple of years of this BS, I think many voting parents will have a change of heart."

If this happened, school districts wouldn't be able to afford the lawsuits.

[Edited on November 2, 2008 at 6:06 PM. Reason : ]

11/2/2008 6:05:49 PM

my fourth grade teacher was useless, we spent most of the time in class playing a game she came up with called 'silent ball'. she was one of these teachers that got awards for her great scores and she eventually became a vice principal somewhere.

11/2/2008 6:49:24 PM

^^ If?

It's happening.

On what basis would the lawsuits be filed? This garbage is federal law.

11/2/2008 7:21:11 PM

why do the answers have to be changed to right answers for it to matter? All it takes is for the kids to get together and talk about it. I'm just reporting what I heard on NPR, though. Take that for what it's worth. I still find it far more likely that kids will be cheating than teachers cheating.

we're not talking about something difficult here, bridget. They don't have to pass answers for the entire test. Only for the ones that they aren't sure on. Same way after a test we go out and ask each other what we put for the ones we weren't sure about. It's the same fucking system, only the kids are doing it in the break that they knew they would get. There's no planning needed whatsoever!

[Edited on November 2, 2008 at 7:55 PM. Reason : ]

11/2/2008 7:52:40 PM

Quote :

"Dude, we're talking about the difference between 80 percent of the kids passing and 40 percent passing. In order to achieve that difference, those bathrooms must have been packed, and all the kids must have miraculously been able to memorize long series of lettter combinations. I mean, when you ask a kid "What's two times 8?" And he says, "Eighty-eight." I don't see that same kid being able to go into a bathroom for fifteen minutes and come out, saying, "Okay, I think I got one through four right. Five through seven were A, C, A. Eight was contested--Charles said it was B and Henry thinks it's C. I guess I'll circle C. I got number 9. Ten, we couldn't figure out. I can't remember what I put for 11 so I'll have to check and make sure I had B. I think I got twelve through nineteen, but just in case, they were ABBCBCA, I'll have to use a memory device for that...let's see Always Buy Black Cherries Before Canned Acorns. Always Buy Black Cherries Before Canned Acorns. Always Buy Black Cherries Before Canned Acorns..." I just don't see forty percent of any population of people being able to pull that off. I guess what I'm saying is that I would attribute the disparity in scores to the "cold, distant" presence of the auditors before I would consider the idea that these kids alone pulled off some massive cheating scheme that would require levels of planning and discipline that most adults don't have."

It's more likely they picked 1 smart student or 2 and just listened to them.

11/2/2008 7:57:09 PM

Quote :

"I still find it far more likely that kids will be cheating than teachers cheating."

I don't.

A) The type of student who flunks EOC's really, really doesn't care enough to run any sort of complex cheating operation (and it would have to be complex-- there are typically 8+ versions of the test). Teachers certainly do.

B) If the tests are anything like NC's, the questions are mostly "higher-level thinking" questions (aka trick questions). Most of the kids who fail would still manage to fail even if they had their textbook out because they lack the basic critical thinking skills required to pass. In other words, 15 days in the bathroom wouldn't do much good.


[Edited on November 2, 2008 at 8:02 PM. Reason : ]

11/2/2008 8:00:00 PM

Quote :

"Best part is that she now has some nice job somewhere else "

yeah in NC

11/2/2008 9:02:53 PM

Quote :

"On what basis would the lawsuits be filed? This garbage is federal law."

Doesn't matter. Frivilous, baseless, or otherwise, it costs money to defend.

Search on Google.

Misspoke with the "if". Standby for lawsuits.

[Edited on November 2, 2008 at 9:27 PM. Reason : ]

11/2/2008 9:24:13 PM

FYI: The type of activity described in the OP is examined in Freakonomics.

11/3/2008 2:07:32 AM

Quote :

"aaronburro: why do the answers have to be changed to right answers for it to matter? All it takes is for the kids to get together and talk about it. I'm just reporting what I heard on NPR, though. Take that for what it's worth. I still find it far more likely that kids will be cheating than teachers cheating. we're not talking about something difficult here, bridget. They don't have to pass answers for the entire test. Only for the ones that they aren't sure on. Same way after a test we go out and ask each other what we put for the ones we weren't sure about. It's the same fucking system, only the kids are doing it in the break that they knew they would get. There's no planning needed whatsoever!"

It's not just a few questions we're talking about here. And it's not just a few kids. We're talking about hundreds of kids.

I don't see why you're not understanding how difficult it would be for the kids to pull that off. I know you think it's outrageous that an adult would change the scores and risk hurting their career, but if you're really, really devoted to a school, and you've made goods gains with a group of kids, and they're not going to get the funding that they need because of some test scores...then it would be very easy to justify changing the test answers.

Not only that, but there's also research that suggests kids perform up to the level that is expected of them. Alter some answers, get some good scores, and maybe they'll believe that they can do well. The school will get some extra loot, a little more respect from the community, kids and parents get inspired. NCLB is bullshit anyway, why not pull a little bullshit yourself to get some students the resources they need?

11/3/2008 3:36:54 AM

how many kids do you think cheat in college? You know that number will be much higher in high school and middle school, then. And, again, this isn't a hard scheme for kids to pull off, especially when they know beforehand they have this break.

Kids "perform up to their expectations," so the teacher will cheat for them at the end of the year? Please.

11/3/2008 5:47:27 PM

It has to be the teachers.

Third graders (8 and 9 year olds) could in no way, shape, or form pull off the organization that it would take to make that grand of scale of cheating happen.

There are kids with all different levels of intelligence and IQ in public schools today. It seems to me that the standardized tests are set up such that "passing" grades are for "average" students. But to make an "average", there have to be students above the line and below the line. I don't agree with standardized testing, and I don't think that everyone is cut out for college.

There really needs to be more emphasis put in the trades in High School. Someone with the equivalent of a two-year tech school degree (something that could easily be taught in high school) can make six figures a year, as long as they are willing to work (thats another thread, BTW), as a certified welder. (CBS Evening News story a week or so ago...couldn't find a link)

11/3/2008 6:09:56 PM

FYI, you are mostly correct Boone. In the 5 EOCs that you mentioned, a kid has to be proficient with a level 3 to get credit(82%). However, there is a standard error of about 5% such that a kid that gets a 77% also gets credit for being proficient. The only catch to this was that the teacher does not get credit for that child being proficient. A law was passed in the spring of 2008 that change that. If a child gets a "C" on the test, then they will be proficient and the teacher will get credit.

If that law was in effect last year, I would have had close to 75% pass(total). I ended up having only 45% pass. My EVAS data said that I should have only expected 20% to pass. Don't be surprised if NC starts using EVAS data to determine AYP results in a few years.

11/3/2008 7:15:37 PM

Aren't they getting rid of standard deviation? Maybe it's just my county...

11/3/2008 7:47:35 PM

Yeah they are, but instead of a kid passing by that one standard error, they just pass. Those kids that would normally fall in that 1 standard error will now have a "3"

11/3/2008 9:23:10 PM