Thursday, February 7, 2013

Seattle Boycott


The Seattle Boycott was a major event in the U.S. that just recently happened. It was a boycott against the MAP or any standardized test given in school. Teachers in Garfield High School are protesting against giving the MAP test because they think that it doesn't really effectively show the student growth over time. The argument is that the students don’t learn most of the material that is given on the test, so it then results in being a waste of time.

Teachers don’t disagree though with the idea of giving tests and other forms to show student growth, they just believe that standardized tests don’t help at all. They want assessments that are related to what they are teaching and show what they have learned over time.   

“Many others, myself included, believe that portfolios, which collect student work and demonstrate yearlong student growth, would be a good replacement for the MAP. Such assessments would be directly tied to our curriculum and would demonstrate improvement over time rather than a random snapshot of a student on one particular day.”



Teachers aren’t alone in trying to get their point across though; parents and students also joined in to get their opinions out. Usually when a boycott of this strength occurs parents usually don’t get involved. It’s always the teachers trying to get their point through.

For me this boycott actually makes complete sense. A standardized test can take up from 1-3 hours, maybe even more, which cuts off a good portion of class time. It wouldn’t be a problem if the time token to take those tests were to be used to take something relevant to what the students are learning in class, but these assessments don’t even do that. Instead of staying in class and actually learn something useful, the students are in front of a computer for hours not even paying attention to what is being done. While in class a couple days ago my teacher asked the class if somebody liked the MAP test I was expecting nobody to raise their hand. I was shocked that someone actually did. The teacher then asked why she liked and she said “ I like it because I don’t have to do anything”, basically implying that she doesn’t take it seriously and just guesses on everything to finish fast and play on the iPad.  After watching this video here, I can tell that the majority of the people who actually take this assessment don’t even care about it. 
So why take a test as long as the MAP, when kids don’t even bother to get anything out of it?

Another good point that was made was that these tests don’t allow students to use creative thinking. If all year the teachers are only focused in teaching the students what is going to fall on the assessment, then the students won’t be able to think out- side the box when they are needed to. Recently having watched this video about how schools in some ways kill the child’s creativity, I had been wondering if all these tests don’t already take away some of it.  If you are only allowed practically to think of the same type questions that have only one answer then how are you supposed to think of something that has many various answers that you won’t be able to have everything planned out. When the students get a job that makes them think in many different perspectives, how are they going to do it if in school they were taught the same things that only would work for standardized tests?



I watched the video, here, that Sir Ken Robinson made about if schools kill creativity. He makes a statement that everyone is born creative but the problem is to remain an artist (creative) as we grow up. We don't grow into creativity but we grow out of it by getting educated. With all the testing it actually makes sense. 
“Our kids will need both traditional academic abilities and innovative critical-thinking skills to solve these real problems. If we inundate our students with standardized testing year-round, these larger lessons are lost.”


In my opinion standardized testing doesn't really show the students growth as properly as it is supposed to. As that video shows students learn differently so it isn't really fair that if one student learns and works slowly then on the timed assessment it won't really show what he has learned that year properly because of the time restraint.  The standardized test is made all the same way so it doesn't show properly the strengths and weakness of the student. It doesn't measure properly the students intelligence, therefore making it a complete waste of time. A better way to show this was allowing the student to create a portfolio or something that is unique to that student so therefore each student can "win" or actually show what they are capable of. 


This picture is a perfect example because of course the elephant aren't going to be able to not because they are "dumb" but because it isn't what their strengths are. If you give a test that only the fish might have a chance like swimming than the others won't be able to show their strengths. To be measured properly what each one is good at then you have to give each one a different assessment and compare it to the one they took early to see if they really did grow or improve. The assessment has to be unique to each one so it can actually be accurate and fair. 

In conclusion standardized testings don't serve the purpose they are supposed to. Student growth can be shown through one test because of many factors so therefore instead of learning something valuable they are "wasting" their time on something that doesn't work out. If I went to Garfield High School I would completely agree with the boycott. This boycott has grabbed the attention of many people around the world including me here in Brazil and has helped many schools see what these standardized tests really are and how they affect the ones taking it.