by David Safier
The world of high stakes test cheating scandals has hit Southern Arizona — or at least, it's made news in Southern Arizona. My sense is this kind of thing has been going on under the radar for awhile now all over the country.
The Star has a print-only article about the possibility — actually, I would say strong probability — that some Sunnyside teachers of first and second graders — yes, first and second graders — cheated to boost their students' scores on "benchmark tests." These aren't AIMS tests. They're tests to see how students are progressing academically in the first two grades before they take their first AIMS test as third graders.
The details of the cheating are of secondary importance, except to say the evidence is pretty damning. The fact that the whistleblower lost her job after complaining to the principal is very important. But for me, it's not the most important point.
The most important point is this: When teacher salaries and jobs, principal salaries and jobs, not to mention school funding, are tied to scores on these tests, the incentive to raise scores by whatever means necessary is overwhelming. Teaching to the test is a legitimate way to raise scores, though it compromises the validity of the scores as a measure of achievement. Cheating — giving students the answers beforehand, "helping" them get the right answer during the test or erasing wrong answers and putting in correct ones after the tests are collected — is simply reprehensible. But the temptation is huge. It's going to happen, and only some teachers and administrators are going to get caught.
Rarely talked about is the perverse effect a few teacher cheats have on the rest of the staff. A sports analogy says it best.
Performance enhancing drugs are illegal in sports for a variety of reasons. One is that other athletes either have to take similar drugs or fall behind drug-enhanced competitors. If lots of top bike racers drug and dope, how can honest athletes hope to stay at the front of the pack?
If one first grade teacher uses "test enhancing" methods — cheating — to boost his/her students' scores and another doesn't, it's going to look like that honest teacher isn't getting the job done.
And what about an honest third grade teacher who inherits these first and second graders whose test scores are higher than their academic abilities? The children's AIMS tests will indicate a drop in achievement compared to their earlier scores, which will leave the impression that the honest teacher hasn't done a good job.
We've bought into the idea that economics-style data collection and analysis will make students learn more. (Does anyone ever question how well the economists have helped us steer this country's economy using the same methodology?) My guess is, it will take about a decade, but the test-data bubble will eventually burst and our obsession with testing, testing, testing will wane.