Next year’s class lists are all set, pending the results of state examinations. Barring any surprises, I could tell you who will be in my classroom, who will be in the accelerated pull out, and who has been tagged as a risk to our district’s funding. Not surprisingly, the groupings are the same as they were last year. In fact, we began the process of dividing the student body into groups for the 2011-2012 school year as early as February.

To an extent, this makes sense. Students who perform at a particular level relative to the peers tend to do so month to month and year to year, with little deviation. But, I’ve spent the last two months wondering if that’s a direct result of the expectations we have for them.

The sad truth is that the students who are identified as low achievers in our district, will carry that tag regardless of the grades on their report cards or test scores. High classroom grades are informally perceived as the result of low expectations or soft grading on the part of the teacher. Possibly the student will receive credit for being the best of a sorry lot. But, even if the student were to earn a perfect score on the state test, she won’t be moved into an honors class. She was tagged back in Grade 2, and this will be her label thoughout her schooling. The best she can do is move up to “college prep”.

On the other hand, honors students with the parents who pushed to get them into the gifted program had better watch out. Our guidance team will comb over each of their report cards and test scores, looking for an excuse to drop them into the mainstream track. This strengthens the middle and culls the weak from the advanced class. As it is, 28% of our sixth grade students were in what are considered advanced classes. That’s four sections of Mathematics and five of Language Arts. I guarantee you that there will only be 3 sections of each by the time they reach eighth grade.

Weighing most heavily on my mind this summer are some of the comments made about student placement in our second to last staff meeting. Our lead guidance counselor spoke openly of his resentment of parent pressures on scheduling decisions, effectively saying that the parents should stay out of the process. In this era of rubrics and selection indices, the teachers in my district believe more in a less transparent, more subjective system. We know who the good (and not-so-good) kids are, and from what I hear and see, it looks like we go with our guts over the rubrics more often than we should.

There’s something wrong about hoping your low achievers don’t score too highly on the state test and disrupt the schedules made mid-year. There’s something equally troubling about giving unequal attention to the performance of the student body.

I would call for you all to be more involved in and aware of you children’s placement processes, but I know too well the repercussions you’ll face: increased scrutiny of your chlid’s work and a negative label for your whole family. I’m certainly no saint, and I’ve resented the input of involved parents on more than one occasion, but that’s nothing compared to what I’ve seen go on behind closed doors.

So what’s the answer? Probably to take your lumps and advocate for your child. You just need to ensure that from that point on you and your child follow through. If you ask for extra opportunities, you had best seize them. If you request support, you had best make full use of it. There are countless eyes looking to use you as a means of deflecting all criticism leveled at the process.

Educator x has been teaching related arts classes at a mid-size, suburban middle school since 2002.

Many teachers complain every year when it gets close to that dreaded state testing time. There are principals who tell them to spend that month before testing doing “test prep.” Is this a good teaching practice? Is it a worthwhile use of our instructional time?

I would venture to guess that most teachers would say no; that we are teaching our students to be nothing but good test-takers. They may not know how to think critically, but they can sure color in those bubbles!

Additionally, most state tests mainly consist of multiple choice test questions. Does this really show what our students have learned? In credential courses teachers learn about the value of informal, ongoing assessments (like simple teacher observations and anecdotal notes), and students choosing work samples for portfolio assessments. Students can be given choices of different project ideas to demonstrate what they have learned.  For example, when I was teaching third grade, we covered a unit of study about Martin Luther King, Jr. At the end of the unit, I wanted my students to demonstrate what they had learned. Rather than give them a traditional multiple choice, matching, true/false, or fill-in-the-blank test, I presented them with a list of choices: they could write a written report, do a puppet show, write and perform a skit, do a PowerPoint presentation, make a poster, or write and perform a poem, rap, or song. I also allowed them to work with partners or in small groups so they could collaborate and use their teamwork skills.

My students were so excited about this project that they asked me to invite in their parents and the principal to see them present their projects. There were two PowerPoint presentations, a puppet show, a skit, and a poster. I truly feel that these projects were meaningful assessments, and my students will remember what they learned for a long time. Students were able to choose something relating to their own interests, learning styles, and tap into those multiple intelligences… and they had fun!

On the other hand, multiple-choice, standardized testing may be a necessary evil. In our current educational world of No Child Left Behind, how can schools demonstrate that students are becoming proficient without some method of standardized testing? With the sheer number of students that need to be tested, the only feasible way is to give them tests that can be computer-scored. Some advocates of this type of testing would say that tests are just another part of life. You take tests throughout your school career, and then come the tests for college – AP Tests, ACT,  PSAT, SAT, GMAT, GRE (the acronyms go on and on…). Some employers require potential employees to take tests before they can be hired. So, testing may just be a part of our society, and teaching students to be good test-takers may be a valuable skill. Test preparation does alleviate some test anxiety because students become familiar with the format, rigor, and types of questions they will encounter on the “real” test. It also allows students to review what they have learned, which helps to reinforce concepts that may have been unclear or just forgotten.

Although there are better ways to assess students’ knowledge and proficiency of subject matter, it does not appear that the current methods of state testing are going to change any time soon. Therefore, it may be in our students’ best interest to help them be prepared for testing. Teachers must be aware of the “burn out factor” though, and not spend too much time on test preparation. Sometimes students spend so much time preparing for the test that they burn out before the real test occurs.

I believe that teachers should spend no more than one to two weeks on test preparation before state testing. Teachers should teach students test-taking strategies, such as reading the questions before reading the passage, eliminating answer choices that cannot be correct, reading all answer choices before choosing an answer, and reading the question carefully. Students should also be sure that they have answered every question. Try to eliminate stress related to the test. For example, I have had students tell me that they think they will be held back and have to repeat the grade if they do not do well on the test. This just adds unnecessary anxiety.

Encourage students to get a good night’s sleep, have a healthy breakfast, and to do their best. That is the most we can ask for.