Testing

This past week I’ve been working with teams on the iReady diagnostics. For those unfamiliar, these are tests that we’re giving to our students that scored a 1 or a 2 that provide us with data on each kid’s strengths and weaknesses. So, for instance, a 6th grader might take it and we’ll learn that they’re on grade level in the domain of algebraic thinking, but they’re on a 4th grade level with geometric skills. This got me thinking about how an administrator should approach testing.

Are we testing these kids too much? That’s a question that was raised a bit this past week and that administrators are increasingly forced to confront. This question is probably particularly relevant in this moment, since our year-round students just took their EOGs a few weeks ago, and now we’re hitting them up with another test. And my answer is… well, I don’t really have one. I’m curious to hear your thoughts though, so I wanted to raise it.

Perhaps the more relevant question is “what do we use these tests for?” Too often we rely on tests for labeling. For categorizing students, staff, and schools into good and bad groupings for the sole benefit of knowing who is better than whom. If that’s the value of testing, then yes, we are absolutely doing it too much. However, if we instead use testing for learning, then maybe we’re not. If we inspect the data to identify just what students, staff, and schools can do to improve, then maybe it’s more useful. That’s one of the aspects I like about iReady. It’s not about the grade (there isn’t one really) but rather about conversations with the kids about how we’re going to help them to become more successful in school and life. It’s up to administration to steer this conversation on testing from labeling to learning.

The last takeaway from this week is that I don’t need to do everything. Last year we rolled out iReady and I did all the testing for the teachers. It was rough for me, and pointless for the teachers. They weren’t involved in the process, therefore the data wasn’t used. This year I’ve done it with the teachers. They were the ones doing the conferences with the kids. They were the ones supervising the testing. I was there to help out, but it was their program, not mine. The differences were night and day. I saw it in the increased scores (students seemed to take it more seriously this way) and I saw it in how teachers vowed to implement this into their instruction. I have a tendency to be overly-reliant upon servant leadership. But sometimes I need to remember that I can do more by doing less.