Apodaca: Time to rethink the role of testing?

When I was a senior in high school, I had an English teacher who had a profound effect on my life. To be honest, at first I thought she was a little weird because she was, well, old. But before long I began devouring the assigned readings — classic novels such as “Siddhartha” by Hermann Hesse and Albert Camus’ “The Stranger” — and looking forward to class.

This teacher inspired me to think deeply and write thoughtfully. I threw myself into producing papers and essays analyzing the books from literary, historical and philosophical perspectives. There were no quick answers, no multiple-choice tests, but plenty of lively discussions and debates, during which I was expected to thoroughly articulate and defend my views. It was one of the best educational experiences I’ve ever had.

I wonder how a terrific teacher like that would be judged in today’s high-stakes, test-centric realm of public education, where the pressure is on like never before.

That’s not to say that we shouldn’t have a means to hold teachers accountable. Certainly there are some incompetent teachers out there, and it isn’t unreasonable to subject them to some kind of ongoing evaluation process.

But if there’s one refrain heard over and over again from teachers, it’s that expectations these days are far too closely tied to standardized test results. Driven by No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top, we have developed what some refer to as a “test-and-punish” system that perpetuates an unfair and oversimplified view of what teachers can and do accomplish given that they must work with a diverse range of students and notoriously inconsistent levels of financial, administrative and parental support.

Lately that complaint is reaching a fevered pitch now that the switch to Common Core State Standards is underway. Despite widespread controversy over the new standards, studies routinely show that an overwhelming majority of teachers actually support Common Core. Yet many also harbor reservations that the accompanying new standardized assessments to be administered this school year will mean that the obsession with testing will not just continue, but that it could reach a new level of crazy.

Their concerns stem partly from the fact that what is being attempted through Common Core is new and highly ambitious and could take many years to be fully realized. But there is great apprehension among teachers that they’ll be slammed with criticism and consequences, if test results early on don’t measure up to expectations, even though those expectations are rather vague at the moment.

The pressure will also be ratcheted up because, for the first time, the test results will be weighed not just against other schools and districts within California but against those of other states. Meanwhile, suspicion runs deep that the reliance on standardized assessments is being driven by the profit-seeking motives of corporations that develop textbooks, tests and other educational materials.

Nationwide, there are two consortia being used by states for their new assessment systems. The one being employed in California, and in 28 other states, has been developed by the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium.

Education officials have cautioned that the new Smarter Balanced assessments will be difficult, reflecting the rigor of the new Common Core-aligned curricula that is being designed in an attempt to encourage students to study subjects more deeply and analytically. The tests will require more writing, for example, and greater explanation of how answers were found. Many educators are warning that some students, at least initially, will struggle.

For many teachers, the increased pressure and scrutiny that will accompany Common Core means that despite the laudable goals of getting students to think more critically, their jobs will still come down to teaching to the tests. If students do well on the tests overall, they’ll be judged a success; if not, they’ll be deemed failures.

Some educators have argued that rather than upping the ante on standardized assessments, the shift to Common Core should be used as an opportunity to rethink the role of testing altogether. It’s not that some testing isn’t needed, they argue, but it should be viewed mainly as a tool for teachers and administrators to receive feedback and adjust their methods accordingly, not as a sledgehammer of accountability.

Rather than “test and punish,” we should have “support and improve,” they say. Some teachers groups have called for, at the minimum, a moratorium on any consequences of testing until some of the bugs are worked out.

But as the debate over Common Core grows more rancorous, the path ahead remains uncertain. Both opponents and supporters of the new standards will no doubt be all over the test scores, mining them for information to support their preconceived positions. Parents will demand to know what, exactly, the test results mean for their kids, and state and local officials will be under the gun to explain and justify them.

And the teachers — already feeling battered and belittled by a system that reduces the sum of their efforts to a few data points — will have their feet nudged uncomfortably closer to the fire.

I learned a long time ago that the gifts of a talented, hard-working teacher can’t be easily quantified. That’s something I plan on remembering come testing time.

PATRICE APODACA is a former Newport-Mesa public school parent and former Los Angeles Times staff writer. She lives in Newport Beach.