When I think of Child Development

When I think of child development… I think of the whole child, I think of learning through play, I think of reading books, and smiling together. I think of healthy food, family time, and outdoor explorations. I created a Wordle, a word cloud, by typing the words I feel are important in the practice of child development. Additionally, I have an affinity for quotes about children and reading and such, so I enjoyed searching for a few favorites and a few new ones to encompass the thoughts I find most important in regards to developing the whole child into a wonderful human being. 

Testing Children in Schools

The use of testing is a strongly debated topic. Many firmly believe in the need for standardized testing, while others stand as firmly against it. Proponents of testing insist that proper testing is imperative to monitor children’s learning for strengths and weaknesses, for all involved to be informed about the school’s achievement, and to be able to hold educators accountable (Walberg, 2011). Opponents to testing have many arguments including that testing is driving the focus of teaching, and taking away from what teachers know are the best practices for teaching and learning. Personally, I stand in the middle. I agree there should be some source of assessment data to compare states, but disagree that that data should come from high stakes standardized tests. I am very frustrated by the focus on test preparation, even for young children, and how that has in many cases stolen time for creative thinking, higher order thinking, arts, physical play, and social interactions; all of which any good educator knows are imperative to developing a whole child well.

In an attempt to gather data, a necessary item in today’s analytical and competitive society, I believe there are several ways education systems could do so without harming good teaching and student’s well-being. One example is that of the New York Performance Standards Consortium (Wallace, 2016). It is a collection of schools in New York, which draw data from teacher-created and/or performance-based assessments rather than standardized tests. These types of assessments will assess understanding at a higher and more real-life level. People often complain that students are not being prepared for real life. Maybe that is because they spend months of every year being prepared for multiple choice tests. I am fairly certain there are not many opportunities to use multiple choice test taking skills in the workforce. However there are many opportunities to evaluate, analyze, synthesize, and apply knowledge through essay writing or project completion; hence, demonstrating higher order thinking rather than only knowledge and comprehension based understanding (see Bloom’s taxonomy for details.) Teachers assess their students in many ways throughout the year, then assuming states are using strong standards and rubrics to guide their teaching and assignments, this type of organized assessment could be very successful.

The countries of the world seem to enjoy comparing their testing scores to each other. Interestingly, while these comparisons which are given much weight, in actuality it does not make much sense when you really think about. The United States compares itself as one country to other countries, when in reality the US is made up of 51 separate and very different school systems (Rosales, 2015). Each system having different socioeconomics, different cultural implications, and different standards for learning. It would make much more sense to compare an individual state to another country, or compare states with other states. More recent studies have realized this and done exactly that. Interestingly, when states with strong standards were compared with other countries, we ranked very well (Wilde, 2015). Another point to consider as to why comparing the US to other countries provides an incorrect picture, is that the US has rules to protect children of all abilities to receive a main stream education. Our inclusion of all disabilities, along with socioeconomic levels within every school system may not be matched by the countries we are comparing ourselves to. In other countries, does everybody attend school and take the tests, or just the children who can afford to attend school? Do children with disabilities, or ELL children take the tests in these other countries?

A few points really struck me while considering the data of comparing the US to other countries. While overall the US ranked 11^th in math and science when compared with other countries through TIMSS, the data gets more interesting when you look at states as individual school systems (National Center for Education Statistics , 2013). First, all 51 US school systems reached the intermediate benchmark in both math and science. Further, in comparison to the TIMSS average of 500, in math 36 states scored higher, and 47 states scored higher in science. When comparing each state with the other countries in Figure 3-A, many of our states placed 6^th, 8^th, and 10^th in mathematics on the TIMSS. For science, Figure 6-A demonstrates that Massachusetts ranked 2^nd, and Vermont ranked 4^{th (National Center for Education Statistics , 2013)}.

All of that aside, it could be beneficial to dive into the “why” and “how” aspects of the higher ranking countries’ approaches to education. Are they in school longer or less? How do their learning standards compare to ours? How does their funding compare? How much play and self-guided learning time is allotted. How do their teacher preparation programs and pay scales compare to ours? While many Asian countries hold the highest rankings, Finland is often looked toward as an example of a high ranking and seemingly happy place for learning. In Finland children start school at age seven, the entire school system follows the same curriculum, and grades are assessed only in high school (Wilde, 2015). The focus seems to be on learning as an experience. Personally, I admire many of their approaches. Still, I recognize that they are an entirely different country from ours, and their model could not translate here without a complete overhaul of other aspects of the government as well. In that regard, one other thought I have had while considering all of this is, how different are the governments of these countries we are comparing ourselves to? And how many of the countries out ranking the US on math, science or reading have socialized health care? I believe I will look into that thought soon. 

The following are a few quotes I found to be especially interesting and driving in my research. 

“Another area where Finland is homogeneous is in school funding. All of Finland’s schools receive the same per-pupil funding, in contrast to the United States where school funding is based upon a complex formula that uses a local-funding component and creates inequities between affluent and poor communities.” (Wilde, 2015)

“The United States attempts to deliver an adequate and equal education through high school to all of its citizens. India, although it produces many scientists and engineers, provides a low-quality primary and secondary education to much of its population. Just 40% of children in India enter high school.” (Wilde, 2015)

“it must be remembered that tests simply collect information and that they are only as valuable as the quality of the information collected and the way that information is utilized. Tests should not take center stage in the classroom, particularly at the expense of meaningful learning time. Schools should design assessment schedules, as well as overall schooling, in ways that maximize the learning experience and foster the positive development of students.” (Lazarin, 2014)

“Used properly, high-quality assessments can be a valuable tool for teachers to determine where students are struggling, for parents to understand their children’s progress and knowledge gaps, and for policymakers and advocates who need assurance that all students are receiving a high-quality education. We simply need to get smarter about when, where and how we use them.” (Lazarin, 2014)

Assessments built into the curriculum are a better way to monitor students than high-stakes standardized tests, said Tanis, the opt-out activist and mother or two. When you attach stakes to the assessment, it "becomes the driving force of what goes on in the classroom," she added. "When it becomes the focus, it really corrupts the nature of teaching and learning." (Wallace, 2016)

References

Lazarin, M. (2014). Testing Overload in America's Schools. Retrieved from: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED561097.pdf: Center For American Progress.

National Center for Education Statistics . (2013). U.S. States in a Global Context - Results From the 2011 NAEP-TIMSS Linking Study. Washington D.C. Retrieved from: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED544218.pdf: Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Rosales, J. (2015, November 2). What International Comparisons Don’t Tell Us About U.S. Student Achievement. NEA Today, pp. Retrieved from: http://neatoday.org/2015/11/02/what-international-comparisons-dont-tell-us-about-u-s-student-achievement/.

Walberg, H. J. (2011). Tests, Testing, and Genuine School Reform. Hoover Institution Press. Retrieved from: https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/waldenu/detail.action?docID=3301882#.

Wallace, K. (2016, April 4). Testing time at schools: Is there a better way? CNN Wire. Retrieved from: http://go.galegroup.com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org.

Wilde, M. (2015, April 2). Global grade: How do U.S. students compare? GreatSchool.org, pp. Retrieved from: https://www.greatschools.org/gk/articles/u-s-students-compare/.