Home > Get Involved > About Us > Mission & Goals > Networking in Action > Networking Archive	Print View

On December 7, a number of Minneapolis parents (at least five) attended the Humphrey Institute Policy Forum on The Value of Standardized Testing: Opportunities and Challenges.

Minneapolis parent Tom Madden posted these notes to the MPS Parents Forum to "share the learning."

Background (from the program description)

No Child Left Behind aims to raise the achievement of all students by providing additional federal funding while holding schools and teachers accountable for student performance. In Minnesota, student test scores have risen dramatically since the federal legislation was passed in 2001. Listen to local experts address the “Value of Standardized Testing: Opportunities and Challenges” at the upcoming Policy Forum Breakfast Club.

Humphrey Institute Senior Fellow Tim Penny and Nate Garvis, vice-president of government affairs for Target, will host a discussion between the following local education experts: Dave Heistad, director of research, evaluation, and assessment for the Minneapolis Public Schools; Pat Olson, assistant commissioner at the Minnesota Department of Education; and Mary Cathryn Ricker, president of the St. Paul Federation of Teachers. Kent Pekel, senior associate for policy at the National Center on Education and the Economy, will moderate.

Meeting Notes (from Tom)

Quotes of interest from the panel (paraphrased):

"Standardized testing used to punish schools/teachers is bad."

–Dave Heistad, Chief of Research, Evaluation, and Assessment
Minneapolis Public Schools

"We [meaning “everyone”] focus on the schools that do poorly rather than on the positives occurring in 70-80% of Minnesota schools."

–Tim Van Sykel, Director or Assessments & Testing
Minnesota Department of Education

Mary Cathryn Ricker, President of the Saint Paul Federation of Teachers, worries about the worst case of standardized testing – that students and teachers no longer get joy from learning and teaching.

All three were interested in the state developing Summative Assessments (comprehensive in nature, provides accountability and used to check the level of learning at the end of the program), but not Formative Assessments (done during a program, thus providing the opportunity for immediate evidence for student learning in a particular course or at a particular point in a program). (Definitions)

One panelist pointed out that numerous studies in the 1970s and 1980s demonstrated the importance of both Principals and Team Teaching in making and keeping schools effective.  Pay for performance (individuals) could ruin teamwork and therefore have a direct effect on better schools.  Since our goal is and should be to teach all kids, then the performance bonuses should be geared toward entire schools and/or groups of teachers rather than individuals.

I absolutely love the last concept as the positive ramifications are numerous!

There was so much more, but those are the key points I took from the discussion.

1. Testing is here to stay.
2. Rather than be punitive, test results should be used to focus on what's working, so we can share the learning from the schools that are doing well.
3. That we need to be very careful about how we structure both the tests and the rewards/punishments so as not to eliminate the joy of learning or discourage teamwork.