Teacher World

I have been blogging about the upcoming meetings which will be held to discuss the assessment process currently in place and ways to improve it. I wish I had seen anywhere in the statements made by either Arne Duncan or the Department of Education the need to revamp the social studies achievement tests. Let me state my case, and feel free to tell me if you agree or not.

One of the issues we have in Ohio, which may or may not be true of all states’ achievement tests, is that so much of our social studies test at the fifth grade level is a fourth grade test, in that it is based on material covered in Ohio history in fourth grade. Now, I understand the rationale that students should remember what they learned the year before and build on that knowledge the next year. But Ohio history and United States history involve two completely different curriculums, and the only time they converge is when we talk about the Mid West region or historical events that occurred in Ohio. Therefore, to ask students on a fifth grade achievement test to recall very specific information about Ohio inventors or battles and other events that occurred in Ohio seems both unfair and unnecessary. How many of us could remember specific details about events we learned about a year ago? Does this really test mastery of the social studies standards?

These tests contain many questions which, in my opinion and other teachers I have spoken to as well, have little or nothing to do with understanding the foundations upon which our nation is built. We should be assessing students’ broader knowledge of important concepts pertaining to:
* the exploration and colonization of our nation and how this affected the Native Americans who lived here
* our fight for independence
* the formation of a workable government through the Constitution of the United States
* the branches of government and how they effectively check and balance each other
* citizen’s rights and responsibilities
* a basic knowledge of economy
* immigration; reasons for it and how it shaped our nation
* how industrialization, transportation, and expansion changed our nation

If our social studies test would address these issues in a broad way, I believe it would be a truer test of how well students understand the country in which they live. Shouldn’t the goal in teaching social studies be to educate the younger citizens to have pride in their country and instill a desire to be responsible, contributing members of the society they will play an active role in when their education is complete? If that is our goal, then shouldn’t our test reflect that goal? Or would we prefer citizens who can recall the Battle of Fallen Timbers and what the most important outcome of that battle was?

Don’t get me wrong. I think it is admirable to have the ability to recite specific and detailed information about the past. I am just not sure that this is the criterion upon which we wish to base mastery of social studies. The time has come to revamp these tests with the true goal in mind; to create citizens who have a solid understanding of their nation and a strong desire to serve it as contributing members. Otherwise, I think we’ve missed the mark.

Educational Reform, state achievement tests, Teacher-World's Blog Add new tag, Arne Duncan, assessment testing, citizens, Department of Education, Educational Reform, social studies achievement tests

This year I volunteered to work with Resource Room children in a co-teaching classroom. I have taught the LD tutored students for years and was looking forward to a change. And what a change it has been! In many ways, I love it and it has taught me both patience and new teaching strategies. But it can also be very frustrating, and we find ourselves questioning whether some of the students would be better serviced in a traditional resource room.

First, the positives: A co-teaching classroom is ideal for those students who need less academic support and perform better when challenged by their peers. Their desire to be in a regular education classroom creates a strong work ethic, and they are extremely successful as a result. It is these students who have made significant growth in our classroom this year. It has been such a pleasure to see their growth and self confidence as the year has progressed. We are hopeful that the OAT tests will reflect their academic progress this year.

I also have had the honor of working with an excellent special education teacher who has taught me so much about how these children process or have difficulty processing information. The techniques she has taught me, her unbelievable patience, and her love for these children has helped me to see them through new eyes. There is an innocence and playfulness in many of them that we often don’t see in our traditional I-need-to-be-cool regular education students. It is refreshing, and I have appreciated their candid nature.

Now, the negative: One of the most pressing concerns of co-teaching is that it drives down test scores on state achievement tests in co-teaching homerooms, and this is a major consideration for teachers. We all know that our test scores are publically scrutinized, and there is no disclaimer that explains the wide range of academic potential in our classrooms. This simple fact is a huge deterrent for many teachers who work hard for good test scores.

Another legitimate concern of co-teaching is that it is not always the best model for reaching the needs of the special education student. We have at least two students this year who we feel would have made more progress in a traditional resource room setting. In retrospect, we wish that option had been available to these students.

I would love to hear from other teachers who have had the opportunity to be involved in a co-teaching classroom. What worked? What didn’t? What are the strengths and weaknesses of the co-teaching model? Let’s do what teachers do best and learn from each other.

Changes in Teaching assessment testing, co-teaching, Resource Room, special education, teaching strategies