It's Not the Test
That Made Them Cheat
Education Week Published Online
April 9, 2013
By Michael J. Feuer
News
came down about the indictment of the former Atlanta schools chief Beverly Hall
and 35 other current and former officials for their alleged roles in a massive
cheating scandal that has rocked the city for the past three years.
There is nothing good
to say about cheating on tests. However,
some of the reactions to the scandal have been surprising. The most troubling response comes from people
opposed to standardized testing generally and to current federal policy
specifically. They somewhat gleefully
use this sorry episode as the ultimate smoking gun, the perfect we-told-you-so
case that clinches their claims about the evils of testing, and the entire
reform movement.
William Ayers, an
education professor emeritus from the University of Illinois at Chicago,
posted, “the Atlanta story proves that teaching toward a simple standardized
measure and relentlessly applying state-administered tests to determine the
outcome both incentivizes cheating and is a worthless proxy for learning. The road to the massive cheating scandal in
Atlanta runs right through the White House.”
Mr. Feuer has several
problems with that logic.
First, shifting the blame for egregious mischief away
from the perpetrators and onto the system strikes me as morally and politically
bankrupt. Here’s an analogy to consider: Do we react to the worst instances of
tax evasion by condemning the concept of taxation rather than by prosecuting
the evaders? I assume that Mr. Ayers would not call for abolition of the
graduated income tax as a way to finance public goods and redistribute wealth
just because the system has its imperfections and because some people lie on
their tax returns. Shall we excuse individual or group criminality because
certain social institutions create pressures for greed and misconduct? Banking
executives accused of fraud will be delighted.
Second,
pinning the responsibility for the Atlanta disaster on the White House is an
extravagant example of misdirected blame. Maybe current federal policies lead
to unwanted outcomes, such as narrowing of the curriculum and teaching to the
test, but that’s a far cry from the outright fraud of the sort listed in the
Atlanta indictment. In any case, there’s
no evidence that federal policy causes cheating, or that “cheating is
inevitable.”
Third,
indicting testing, rather than cheating, undermines the possibility for reform
in the design and uses of tests.
What’s often ignored in the popular frenzy against
testing is that tests can help gauge individual learning, give teachers
additional information about their students’ progress, provide objective
indicators of student achievement, and expose inequalities in the allocation of
educational resources.
I
rescue failing students by remedying the Barriers to Learning