CSAPs provide valuable diagnostic tool to improve teaching, learning

By Mary F. Barter, Ph.D.

February 16, 2005

 

                Today marks the beginning of the annual CSAP testing cycle with third-graders taking reading and writing tests this week and math the next. Fourth- through 10th-grade students will be tested March 15-24 on reading, writing, and math, and eighth-graders will take an additional test on science.

                According to the requirements of No Child Left Behind, at least 95 percent of eligible students overall, and subgroups of students as identified by ethnicity, income status, English language proficiency, and special education enrollment, must take the CSAP tests in reading and math for the district to meet Adequate Yearly Progress – or AYP. If participation rates fall below 95 percent in any category, the district and its schools could face financial sanctions that would reduce the amount of funding available for reading teachers and other tutoring and support programs.

                That’s one reason why the district hopes that every parent will support this year’s testing program by ensuring that students are present and on time for their tests, that they get a good rest the night before, and that they eat a nourishing breakfast the day of the test.

                Testing doesn’t last forever. In fact, CSAPs take only a few hours of class time each year. Third-graders will spend about four hours total on reading, writing, and math tests, while fourth- through 10th-graders will spend a mere five hours and 15 minutes on testing. Eighth-graders will spend a total of eight hours with the addition of the science test.

                Total CSAP testing time is less than a day for all but our eighth-grade students, yet the tests yield valuable information that teachers and administrators use all year long to improve our educational programs and to address the specific learning needs of individual students.

                For example, we are able to identify from the CSAP test scores those students who need help with phonics versus those who are weak in reading comprehension. We can identify and assist students who need more work on spelling, grammar, punctuation, or organization in their writing. And we can identify whether we need to work on communication skills or math facts to raise a student’s math score from unsatisfactory to proficient.

                From an educator’s perspective, the CSAPs are well worth the time and effort our students invest. Unfortunately, their role as an educational assessment and diagnostic learning tool has been lost in the political rhetoric of educational accountability.

The Colorado Legislature established the Colorado Student Assessment Program to hold school districts accountable for ensuring that students meet the Colorado Model Content Standards – the state’s learning goals that each student is expected to achieve at each grade level. However, CDE uses test scores to reduce overall school performance to one word – unsatisfactory, low, average, high, or excellent – for the State Accountability Reports. The SARs ostensibly allow parents to compare one school’s performance over another, but the rankings often conflict with information parents receive for the federal accountability system established under No Child Left Behind.

NCLB requires school districts to make adequate yearly progress by meeting specific student performance targets. Each year, the Colorado Department of Education sets a goal for the percentage of students who must score partially proficient, proficient, or advanced on the CSAP reading and math tests, so that by 2014, no student scores unsatisfactory.

Durango High School – and therefore Durango School District 9-R – missed AYP in 2004 by three unsatisfactory CSAP reading scores and 18 unsatisfactory math scores among our ninth- and 10th-grade special-education students. As a result, the high school and school district were placed “on improvement” status under No Child Left Behind, although the high school received a “high” performance ranking on the State Accountability Report. We’re not alone; 67 out of 182 school districts statewide failed to meet AYP last year, and those 67 school districts enroll 88 percent of the students in the state of Colorado. Furthermore, every school district with more than 5,400 students failed to make AYP.

The contradictions between the state and federal accountability systems and the massive AYP failures statewide have created a high-stakes environment that have some parents concerned about the pressure placed on their students to perform, and that, in turn, has spawned a short-lived movement among Colorado parents to boycott the CSAPs this year. A boycott, however, will not effect the policy changes that parents want. It will serve only to reduce the amount of information teachers need to provide their students with an effective instructional program, and it could significantly reduce the amount of funding available to provide our students with reading and math specialists and other academic support services.

                Rather than boycotting a useful diagnostic tool that informs good teaching and learning, I urge parents to direct their energies toward changing the state and federal policies that have created the high-stakes environment they find so objectionable.