Do State Standardized Science Tests Bring out the Chicken Little in Us?

Inez Liftig

Recently, discussions of state standardized science tests have been spreading anxiety and dread in science department meetings and teacher lounges across the country. Tired of the “sky is falling” tone of these conversations, I decided to stop for a moment and take a look at the sky myself. In mid-July, I participated in the Connecticut Mastery Test (CMT) Science Rangefinding Committee for the constructed-response items related to inquiry-based performance tasks for grades 6–8. The items are designed to test students’ mastery of three performance tasks developed by the state, which are based on our state content standards. (Our state standards are based on the National Science Education Standards.) The goal is for the three tasks to be incorporated into the grades 6–8 curriculum, one at each grade level. As a result, students will have completed the tasks and be prepared to write the short essays for the related constructed-response items on the science section of the CMT given at the end of grade 8.

The entire CMT test, not just the constructed-response items, was piloted this spring and will be administered to all middle-level students in 2008, as required by the No Child Left Behind Act. Connecticut has had a science test for students in grade 10 for nearly 10 years, but the 2008, CMT will survey science content knowledge and inquiry skills of students in grade 5 and grade 8 for the first time in the history of standardized testing in our state. Committees of teachers have been involved in each step of establishing the frameworks and in designing the format of the test. A panel has also had a hand in the development of test questions.

The grade 8 CMT Science Assessment is scheduled to take 70 minutes and will contain 48 questions—45 selected (multiple-choice type) items worth 1 point each, and 3 constructed-response items worth 2 points each. Of the 45 selected-response items, 30 will address content knowledge in life, Earth, and physical science, 20% of the test devoted to each area. The three constructed-response items and 15 selected responses, comprising 40% of the test, will address scientific inquiry, literacy, and numeracy. The three constructed responses will directly relate to the inquiry-based performance tasks for grades 6–8.
The selected-response items will be scored by machine. The constructed-response items will be hand-scored by trained readers on a three-point scale (0–2). The State Department of Education (SDE) convened a panel of teachers (I was one of them), science supervisors, and principals to score many sample student responses to the constructed-response items on the pilot test. Officials and trainers of hand scorers for the corporation that will oversee the testing were present and took copious notes as we argued, debated, and discussed what score we would each give the various student papers we analyzed. Our input will be used to establish benchmark papers for use in training hand scorers.

This summer I have seen first hand that the Connecticut SDE (www.state.ct.us/sde) is working hard to get it right by devoting time, money, and effort to include higher-order, inquiry-related, constructed items that require hand scoring. Having 40% of the test based on scientific inquiry, literacy, and numeracy sends a clear message to Connecticut science teachers that these skills should be given priority in the classroom. The 70 minutes needed to administer the CMT science assessment will provide teachers and districts with insight into what students know and are capable of doing. Any “teaching-to-the test” will only improve classroom practice and student learning.

Before you run for cover in anticipation of the world crashing down around you, take a good look at what is happening in your state. Find out all you can about your state’s standardized science test. Most state departments of education have websites where you can learn about the format of the test and the framework on which it is based. Use any available resources they offer. Join any panels and committees, give feedback on documents, write to officials with your input, and do whatever you can to understand the nature of the test. The more you know about the test, the less dread and anxiety you will experience. If you are lucky, you might just come away, like I did, with much more respect for the people who are in charge of designing standardized tests and the opportunities these test may provide for improving instruction and students’ overall understanding of science.

Inez Liftig

Editor

P.S. I want to hear from you. What is your best suggestion for getting needed science equipment and supplies on a very limited budget? Email your suggestions to zenisci8@aol.com.

Click here for PDF file.