Sunday, January 9, 2011

Thoughts on this week's readings

Re: EQAO & Gap-gazing

To begin with I have to admit that I have never heard of the term ‘gap-gazing’, the concept, yes, but not this terminology. Also, I have to say that I have had the opportunities to read and research gap analyses as defined by Lubienski; the idea of looking at results of students on achievement tests and seeing these results used as a comparative tool (e.g. White-Black, White-Latino, etc.). I do agree with Lubienski that these tools can be used effectively in changing my teaching practicing and in fact every year as an IB teacher I receive three pieces of information: individual student result, math grade results compared to world and a report that explicitly gives feedback to what areas (topics) were considered difficult. I use this information to change what/how I teach the following year. I feel that this is invaluable.

However, I understand Gutiérrez’s concern that comparing White-Black, White-Latino, etc. is a very limiting tool and I was surprised to learn that longitudinal studies have not been done (or not enough) to look at how a particular group (Blacks, Latinos, Asian, girls, boys, etc) has gained (or not gained, if this should be the case) understanding of mathematical concepts over the years, that only the above achievement results are truly looked at. This is a concern for how can any teacher help a student or group of students if we do not truly understand what success or failure, what concepts do they understand or not understand, if we only see how one group succeeded against another. I have to admit I work in a fairly homogenous environment, but even in this environment I could provide a more enriched learning environment if I had research information that shows me clearly what works for my group of students. I did find it interesting that Gutiérrez still approved of standardized tests; I would have thought that the high stakes aspect of these tests and the overwhelming role that the results could play in policy making (in the US, school results could mean lost of funding or even school closure, happily EQAO results have not led to this for Ontario thus far), that Gutiérrez would like to see these tests removed. Yet she feels that these tests measure her concept of excellence, but do they really?

With respect to the EQAO article, I found this paper to be too ‘rah-rah’, but understandable as this is a government created organization and they want to show the stakeholders (parents, students) that improvement is being seen in mathematics. However, if one looks closely at the numbers, the EQAO claims are a bit generous. Yet, I do not feel that I can comment too much about the validity of these tests as currently my school does not administer any of these tests other than the Grade 10 Literacy test. I look forward to talking to other teachers about these tests and if they are a) good indicators of improvement b) helpful in the teaching of the math curriculum or c) if the results do help teachers to change practice accordingly.

Thank you.

Leslie

9 comments:

  1. It's refreshing to hear that you find your reports invaluable, Leslie. I think the EQAO reports can be helpful as well.

    Our reading is a general report but teachers have access to the Item Information Reports (IIRs) which can provide valuable information on the specific parts of the curriculum that students struggled with during the assessment. Grade 4, 7 and 10 teachers would benefit from this information since the students who wrote the assessments in Grades 3, 6 and 9 are in their classes.

    Unfortunately, the reports do not get used because of the negativity associated with EQAO. However, they are useful in the teaching of mathematics.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Leslie,

    In terms of using the EQAO data, I know that my school on a yearly basis goes over the results and in our math department meetings try to come up with strategies to help the groups of students who do not achieve as well as the rest (i.e. students in the applied level stream and students identified as English Language Learners, ELL). I think there is a bit of "teaching to the test" going on (I'm not sure but it could just be at my school), as grade 9 math classes sometimes have an EQAO practice question to work on for warm-up or consolidation.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Vivien, there is A LOT of teaching to the test going on in a lot of schools. But I think that's the point. I was at a meeting recently where the ACL of one of our schools reminded the audience that teaching to the test is teaching the curriculum as well.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Leslie,

    I too am surprised that Gutiérrez still approves of standardized tests. Gutiérrez makes the point that the “gap focus ignores broader notions of mathematical literacy: mathematics for use beyond school, how well students are being prepared for college, and mathematics as a tool to analyze society and to solve problems of importance in one’s life.” I agree that those skills are just as important as basic skills mastery, and I wonder if any kind of standardized test is able to measure those skills in a meaningful way.

    I’m also glad to see that someone else is a bit uneasy with the claims made based on the numbers. While none of the claims are inaccurate, I wonder what about the margin of error on the data set and whether an increase of one percentage point is really statistically significant.

    Rohini

    ReplyDelete
  5. I also found it odd that Gutiérrez defined excellence, at least partly, as "high performance on standardized tests." While I wouldn't say that I completely disapprove on standardized tests, mostly because I've only heard about their drawbacks and benefits anecdotally, I wonder how effectively any standardized assessment could address the political and social contexts that students live in and the different forms of discrimination that they face.

    I appreciated Gutiérrez's comment that putting a strong focus on gaps normalizes the "low achievement" that some groups have without looking at the causes. While I think that making note of these gaps can be useful in looking for problems in the system (just like knowing the median grade of a class gives you some information as to whether or not the material was delivered effectively), I can certainly believe that emphasizing them might encourage teachers to unconsciously expect less from those who fall within the "low achieving" groups.

    ReplyDelete
  6. math coach,

    I'm a little confused about teaching to the test being the same as teaching the curriculum. I'm also at a school that does not administer any of these tests other than the OSSLT, and I'm really not very familiar with the content of the EQAO math tests or with what tends to go on in the "warm-ups" that Vivien mentioned.

    My understanding is that the EQAO is supposed to be assessing knowledge of curriculum content, but if that's the case, why do students need specific EQAO practice questions? Why is learning the curriculum not enough?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Having not been a fan of standardized testing, I too was surprised at Gutiérrez's comment regarding a focus on this. After becoming more familiar with the results of the assessments and the tracking of EQAO I can now see much more usefulness in it than I did before, but it still needs to be recognized as "one" form of assessing learning on "one" day age various age levels. The emphasis placed on these results is far too great.

    ReplyDelete
  8. EQAO as a standardized math test encompasses richer tasks than many standardised tests. When EQAO came in, it forced many teachers to move to a broader conception of what mathematics was. Before EQAO, my children did arithmetic, afterwards they did problems and a range of mathematics, but the first years were stressful for teachers and students alike.

    My small secondary school in a rural community has achieved substantial gains in our EQAO scores- for example on the math assessment from 70% of academic students at level 3 to 96% at level 3 or 4. Some of this gain is from more thorough teaching of curriculum, some is teaching what a level 4 answer looks like (we had our first level 4 last year). But the biggest gain was a small gain in policy:
    If a student has 70% on term work and a level 3 or better on EQAO as we mark it, they don't have to write the final exam. This small incentive encouraged our level 2 students who didn't care about marks that it was worth that little bit of extra effort all sememster to get a 70%- and the teachers believe that better learning is the result (it isn't just a better test).

    ReplyDelete
  9. To be fair, I don't think Gutiérrez is a big fan of standardized tests, either. But in the current educational climate, if students did not do well on these tests, they would be the ones penalized. So, even if the tests aren't great, achievement on those tests is still an equity issue.

    ReplyDelete