[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 169 (Thursday, November 20, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S15275-S15278]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CONSEQUENCES OF THE NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACT FOCUS ON STUDENT TESTING
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, this month public school students around
Wisconsin are sharpening their No. 2 pencils and settling in to take a
series of annual tests called the Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts
Examinations. These exams, given to students in grades four, eight, and
ten, test students' knowledge of reading, language arts, math, science,
and social studies.
These tests--and their results--have taken on new meaning for schools
around my State as students and teachers in Wisconsin settle into their
second school year under the No Child Left Behind Act. This law, the
centerpiece of the President's domestic agenda, requires that students
in grades three through eight and in one high school grade be tested
annually in reading and math beginning in the 2005-2006 school year,
with annual science tests to be added 2 years later. Thus, Wisconsin
will be required to expand the WKCEs, and the already-existing annual
third grade Wisconsin Reading Comprehension Test, to include new
reading tests for students in grades five, six and seven; and new math
tests for students in grades three, five, six, and seven.
As I travel around Wisconsin, I hear time and again from frustrated
parents, teachers, administrators, and school board members about their
concerns with the ongoing implementation of the NCLB. I began to hear
such comments more than 2 years ago when the President first proposed
his education
[[Page S15276]]
initiative, and this drumbeat of concern has increased as my
constituents continue to learn first-hand what this new law means for
them and for their students and children. While Wisconsinites support
holding schools accountable for results, they are concerned about the
focus on standardized testing included in the President's approach.
I opposed the President's education bill in large part because of
this new annual testing mandate. The comments I have heard from people
across Wisconsin about this new program have been almost universally
negative. Parents, teachers, administrators, and others in the
education community have told me that they are concerned about the
effect that over-testing will have on Wisconsin's public school
students. They oppose another layer of federally mandated testing for
many reasons, including the cost of developing and implementing the
additional tests, the loss of teaching time every year to prepare for
and take the tests, and the unnecessary pressure that these additional
tests will place on students, teachers, schools, and school districts.
The pressure to do well on annual tests is already weighing on the
teachers and schools in Wisconsin, even with 2 years to go before the
additional tests are required. The stakes are very high for schools and
school districts. The results on these annual tests are a central part
of the complicated formula that determines whether a school is meeting
or exceeding its ``adequate yearly progress'' goals. Failure to meet
AYP goals in two or more consecutive years will lead to sanctions for
the schools and districts in question. I have heard from many
constituents about the complex AYP system, and what being determined to
be a ``school in need of improvement'' or a school that ``has not met
AYP'' will mean for--and how these designations will be interpreted
by--parents, students, school personnel, and the general public.
In order to measure AYP, Wisconsin and other States are required
under NCLB to look at four indicators for each school and district:
test participation, graduation and attendance criteria, reading
achievement, and math achievement. Three of these four criteria are
based on the annual standardized tests. This is troubling because the
future of individual schools and school districts is riding on student
participation in and success on just two exams--reading and math. These
core subjects are important, to be sure, but I am concerned that this
exclusive focus on testing--which is a top-down mandate from the
Federal Government--may be detrimental to the successful education of
our children, who could benefit from a more flexible approach.
As a recent editorial in the La Crosse Tribune points out, ``the
stakes on the schools are high. Buy what about students? The test
result doesn't appear on their transcript and it doesn't count toward a
grade or graduation.'' And what if a student had a bad day? Or what if
the required amount of students don't take the tests, and the school
fails to meet the 95 percent participation rate required by the NCLB? A
missed participation rate 2 years in a row would mean that the school
is ``in need of improvement,'' even if the students who took the tests
did well on them.
In addition, some of my constituents are concerned about the value of
these tests to students, parents, and teachers. According to one
teacher, the existing tests don't have any meaning to students and have
little meaning to classroom teachers. And the Federal Government has
mandated that students take even more tests without developing a system
that makes these new tests, or the existing ones for that matter,
meaningful to students.
The impact of these standardized tests on students varies. Some
students already have test anxiety and that anxiety may well increase
unnecessarily. As the stakes increase for schools, the increased stress
level is sure to filter down from administrators to teachers to
students. For example, members of the Wisconsin School Counselors
Association told me that they have been handing out apple-shaped
``stress balls'' for anxious third graders to squeeze while taking
their reading tests.
While some students experience stress out about tests, others simply
do not care about the tests at all, and fill in random answers or turn
in blank test sheets--after all, there's no penalty if they do so. For
students who are struggling, however, a low test score on a
standardized test can be demoralizing. According to one Wisconsin
teacher, ``Students are being evaluated on one single test. What if the
student has a bad day? . . . [T]he truly scary part is that
standardized tests ensure that half of our students will always be
'below average.' How can we meet the benchmark that everyone will score
proficient and advanced when the tests are designed to never let that
happen? . . . Taking more tests is not going to improve learning.''
Most students, of course, try their best. But they are confused about
why they are taking tests that do not count toward their grades, and
many students and parents are confused by the results of these tests.
With the stakes rising for schools and districts, some schools in
Wisconsin have resorted to offering what amounts to bribes to encourage
the students to participate in the WKCEs and to do well on them. Since
the tests have little consequences for individual students, but very
serious consequences for schools and districts, some schools are
pulling out all of the stops to get students to take these tests
seriously.
According to a recent article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, some
schools are offering prizes to students who show up and complete their
exams. These prizes range from movie tickets to gift certificates for a
local mall to big ticket items such as a television and a DVD player.
Some schools are offering exemptions from end-of-semester exams for
students who do well on the WKCEs. One elementary school is promising
students additional recess periods, snacks, and movies. One teacher
told my staff that her school is allowing students to engage in one of
the ultimate school no-nos chewing gum in the classroom in order to
help to relieve the stress of taking the tests.
I will ask that the complete text of the two articles that I have
referenced be printed in the Record.
Mr. President, schools in my State are already feeling the pressure
to compel students to participate in and succeed on annual tests 2
years before the additional, federally mandated tests are added to the
mix. I am concerned about the implications that this pressure, and the
resulting scramble to get students to take these tests seriously, will
have on public education in my State. I am not saying that schools
should not be required to be successful or to show improvement in
student performance. Of course, all schools should strive to ensure
that they are successful and that their students show improvement.
But these examples from my State are clear evidence of one of the
basic problems with the NCLB--its exclusive focus on test scores as the
main measure of student achievement. When schools feel compelled to
hand out goodies to get students to take tests seriously, those tests
are not serving their intended purpose. Certainly, tests have their
place in education. But tests should be used as one of multiple
measures of student achievement, not as the sole means of determining
the success or failure of a school.
I am extremely concerned that the new Federal testing mandate will
not achieve the desired result of better schools with qualified
teachers and successful students. I fear that this new mandate will
curtail actual teaching time and real learning in favor of an
environment where teaching to the test becomes the norm. The
unfortunate result of this would be to show our children that education
is not about preparing for their futures, but rather about preparing
for tests--that education is really about sharp No. 2 pencils and test
sheets, about making sure that little round bubbles are filled in
completely, and, if their school districts and States have enough
money, maybe about exam booklets for short answer and essay questions.
I am also deeply concerned that this focus on testing will rob teachers
of valuable teaching time and will squelch efforts to be innovative and
creative, both with lesson plans and with ways of measuring student
performance.
For these reasons, earlier this year I introduced the Student Testing
Flexibility Act, a bill that would return a
[[Page S15277]]
measure of the local control that was taken from States and local
school districts with the enactment of the NCLB. This bill would allow
States and school districts that have demonstrated academic success for
2 consecutive years the flexibility to apply to waive the new annual
testing requirements in the NCLB. States and school districts with
waivers would still be required to administer high-quality tests to
students in, at a minimum, reading or language arts and mathematics at
least once in grades 3-5, 6-9, and 10-12 as required under the law.
This bill is cosponsored by Senators Jeffords, Dayton, and Leahy. I
am pleased that this legislation is supported by the American
Association of School Administrators; the National Education
Association; National PTA; the National Association of Elementary
School Principals; the National Association of Secondary School
Principals; the School Social Work Association of America; the National
Council of Teachers of English; the Wisconsin Department of Public
Instruction; the Wisconsin Education Association Council; the Wisconsin
Association of School Boards; the Milwaukee Teachers' Education
Association; the Wisconsin School Social Workers Association; and the
Wisconsin School Administrators Alliance, which includes the
Association of Wisconsin School Administrators, the Wisconsin
Association of School District Administrators, the Wisconsin
Association of School Business Officials, and the Wisconsin Council for
Administrators of Special Services.
I would also like to take a moment to discuss the recently released
National Assessment on Educational Progress scores. In addition to a
massive new annual testing requirement, the NCLB also requires States
to participate in the previously voluntary NAEP tests for fourth grade
reading and math, which are given every 2 years. Proponents of high-
stakes testing argue that NAEP participation will help to ensure that
the results of State-administered tests are valid, and that States are
not ``dumbing down'' their tests in order to avoid Federal sanctions.
The NAEP scores that were released last week are the results of the
first round of required testing under the NCLB, and, for the first
time, include scores from all 50 States, the District of Columbia, and
2 schools run by the Department of Defense. While the nation-wide test
results are an improvement over the NAEP administered 2 years ago, I am
deeply concerned about the lingering racial disparities in the test
results.
I am particularly concerned that the test scores for the
approximately 25,000 Wisconsin eighth graders who took this test lead
the Nation in the gap between White and African-American students on
both the reading and the math tests. While the NAEP was taken by only a
small percentage of students in my State and around the country, we
cannot ignore the racial disparities in the test scores and the need to
do more to ensure that all students have an equal opportunity for a
quality education.
The Secretary of Education heralded the NAEP results, saying, ``These
results show that the education revolution that No Child Left Behind
promised has begun.'' If these test scores prove anything, it is that
too many children are being left behind. Study after study has shown
that disadvantaged students lag behind their peers on standardized
tests.
I regret that the President and the Congress have not done more to
ensure that schools have the resources to help these students catch up
with their peers before students are required to take additional annual
tests that will have serious consequences for their schools. If we fail
to provide adequate resources to these schools and these students, we
run the risk of setting disadvantaged children up for failure on these
tests--failure which could damage the self-esteem of our most
vulnerable students.
Instead of focusing resources on those students and schools needing
the most help, I am afraid that the testing provisions in the
President's bill will punish those very schools with sanctions that
will actually take badly needed funding away from them.
I would like to note that my constituents have raised a number of
other concerns about the NCLB that I hope will be addressed by
Congress. I continue to hear about complex guidelines and a lack of
flexibility from the Department of Education. I hear about the unique
challenges that the new tutoring, public school transfer, and other
requirements pose for rural districts. My constituents often ask when
the Federal Government is going to provide the funding it promised for
education programs. I share my constituents' concern about imposing new
sanctions on schools that do not meet yearly goals even though the
programs that would help students and schools to meet those goals are
not fully funded.
I will continue to monitor closely the implementation of the NCLB and
its effect on public school students in Wisconsin.
I ask unanimous consent the articles to which I referred be printed
in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Nov. 9, 2003]
Take a Test, Get a Prize
(By Amy Hetzner)
Some day soon, teams of Case High School sophomores could
be sitting in a Racine movie theater and thanking President
Bush.
In an attempt to boost the number of students taking the
State's standardized test this week, Case High School will be
handing out movie passes to every 10th-grader who completes
the battery of exams.
It's just one of many efforts, which include a TV giveaway
at another school, to improve student performance and
participation on the Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts
Examinations, or WKCEs.
In many Wisconsin schools, the testing began for fourth-,
eighth- and 10th-graders last week and will continue until
Nov. 21. The tests cover reading, language arts, mathematics,
science and social studies.
If nothing else, the new incentives show the growing
importance that President Bush's No Child Left Behind Act has
placed on annual state testing.
If students slip up, they could cause their school to be
labeled as needing improvement and sent on a path to
escalating sanctions imposed by the Federal law. If, for
example, less than 95% of students take the tests two years
in a row, a school may have to allow students to transfer
elsewhere.
But the students themselves have little incentive to put
forward an effort. The exam doesn't count toward a grade or
graduation and won't appear on any transcript.
As Larry Black, principal of Big Foot High School in
Walworth, puts it: ``For schools, they're high-stakes tests.
For students, they're low stakes. . . . And that's a bad
match.''
Rolling out the rewards
To help surmount that obstacle and hopefully avoid being
labeled for improvement, two Racine high schools are rolling
out the rewards just to get students to take the tests.
In addition to free movie passes, Case students can qualify
for $10 cash awards, Regency Mall gift certificates, school-
spirit wear and other prizes--simply by showing up this week
and answering the exam's questions.
At Racine's Horlick High School, the goodies are even
bigger. The school is planning several raffles for each of
the two days of testing this week, at which students can
win a television set, DVD player and CDs, Principal Nola
Starling-Ratliff said.
The incentives are geared to increase both schools' test
participation rates, which last year fell below the required
95% of students.
Miss that goal for a second year and both schools would
have to allow students to transfer to other district schools
under the federal law. A third year of missing their target
would force the schools to offer extra tutoring in math and
reading.
The high schools facing the threat of sanctions aren't the
only ones proffering perks this year, however.
Gifford Elementary School in Racine also dangled the
prospect of an extra recess, movie privileges and anonymous
treats before any fourth-grade class that had perfect
attendance during the week of testing.
``It's made a huge difference,'' Gifford Principal Steve
Russo said. ``Every morning we talk about testing with the
kids. We encourage them to do the best job, to take pride in
their work.''
critic pans reward system
But Alfie Kohn, a national opponent of high-stakes testing,
called such rewards ``coercive'' and ``disrespectful'' toward
students. ``Even if higher test scores were a good idea, you
don't treat children like pets by dangling the equivalent of
doggie biscuits before them when they perform to your
liking,'' said Kohn, a Massachusetts-based author of the
book, ``Punished by Rewards.''
School officials, however, say there's nothing wrong with
giving students a little push.
Five years ago at Arrowhead High School in Waukesha County,
test scores took a serious dip when about 80 sophomores
refused to complete the exams, instead turning in blank forms
in protest of a test they felt was meaningless. If a school's
students were to do the same today, their action could have
[[Page S15278]]
more serious consequences for their school in addition to
giving it a public black eye.
``We never want to fall into the category where the
school's `in need of improvement' just because students
didn't take the test seriously,'' said Arrowhead
Superintendent David Lodes.
a reason to try
So this year, Arrowhead will give its students a reason not
only to take the test but also to try.
The school is offering its students a chance to skip final
semester examinations in their regular classes if they do
well on their WKCEs--scoring at least at the proficient or
advanced level in the subject area that corresponds with the
class exam they want to avoid.
It's the first year Arrowhead High School has made such an
offer, which has been announced to students but is still
waiting for formal approval from the School Board.
Arrowhead students who do exceptionally well on the WKCE--
scoring at the advanced level on all the tests--also will be
allowed to spend their junior-year study hall classes in the
senior commons in the pilot effort.
Other schools in the state offering exam exemptions include
Big Foot High School, Hartford Union High School and Pulaski
High School near Green Bay. Bay Port High School in the
Howard-Suamico School District gives students a chance to
drop a low-scoring test with a proficient score in the
subject area.
``I think we should be able to come up with a way where we
can get our students to give their best effort,'' Lodes
said. ``Everybody needs to do as best as they possibly
can. Yet everybody wants to be rewarded.''
Arrowhead students say they can see a difference.
``I'm actually trying a little harder now,'' said Zack
Olson, a 15-year-old sophomore at Arrowhead, where testing
began last week.
Previously, Olson said he might not have studied for the
test at all. But with the lure of getting out of final exams
and a nicer study hall environment, he said he's been doing
the practice work that teachers have offered.
Another Arrowhead sophomore, Adam Moir, said he was even a
little nervous the night before testing began because he
wasn't sure what to expect.
He said a lot of students will be motivated to try to get
out of their final exams. ``But, in the same way, there are
some students that could care less about school,'' Moir said.
``I'm not one of them.''
[From the La Crosse Tribune]
Our View: Make Federal Testing Fit With Curriculum
(By Tribune editorial staff)
Why are some school districts offering movie tickets and
other prizes as an inducement to take the tests required
under President Bush's ``No Child Left Behind'' law?
They are doing it because students have little incentive to
participate in the testing, even though a bad result can
result in a Federal Government listing as a failed school.
Under the Federal legislation, schools are required to
subject students to testing once a year. If students do not
participate, the school could face sanctions. For instance,
if less than 95 percent of the students show up for testing
two years in a row, the school could have to allow students
to transfer elsewhere.
So, the stakes on the schools are high. But what about
students? The test result doesn't appear on their transcript
and it doesn't count toward a grade or graduation.
A story in Sunday's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel said that
the Racine, Wis., School District gives away movie tickets to
get kids to show up. Another, unnamed, district is giving
away a television set. Still another district--Arrowhead
schools in Hartland, Wis., is letting students who take the
test opt out of some final exams.
None of this sounds like it is educationally sound, but
school administrators say they have little other incentive to
get students to take the test. Isn't there a better way to
judge school performance than using a test that has no other
meaning than providing a potential for Federal punishment?
Are there no other valid measurements of student performance?
Giving prizes as an inducement to take a test seems of
dubious value. But maybe we ought to be looking for ways to
reconcile the federal government's need for performance data
with schools' existing curriculum and practices.
____________________