A reality based independent journal of observation & analysis, serving the Flathead Valley & Montana since 2006. © James Conner.
Unlike a good many educators, parents, and students, I favor standardized tests, and frequent standardized testing. I also favor a national curriculum, but that’s a subject for a future post. But I’m a bit skeptical of the trend to administer standardized tests by computer.
It’s not that I’m an old fogey who’s nostalgic for paper and pencil tests. In theory, a computer can tailor a test to an individual through if Answer A, then Question C, if Answer B, then Question X, logic. In practice, that gets very complicated very quickly, and validating the scores, proving that the test measures what it’s supposed to measure, is difficult. Yet the power of the computer is seductive, enticing test designers to attempt more than they should. And because the tests are developed by private companies instead of government agencies, competitive pressures lead to promises that can’t be delivered. That’s what happened recently in Montana with Common Core (which I also support) related tests.
At the Washington Monthly’s College Guide blog, Daniel Luzer, in a must read post, today discussed the drawbacks of administering tests by computer in Students Hate to Take Standardized Tests on Computers, concluding:
If we went back to paper tests, that would cost the companies that administer the tests a hell of a lot of money. But this way, it’s not the test makers that suffer here; the schools have to run around to make it work for the testing companies. It’s just the students who suffer.