FINAL
PROJECT OF SOCIOLINGUISTICS ON LANGUAGE TEACHING
Possibilities
and Problems of a Standards-Based Approach: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
By
SUPRAYOGA
NIM.
100221509259
State university of malang
graduate program in English language TEACHING
2012
Possibilities and Problems of a Standards-Based Approach: The Good, the Bad,
and the Ugly
A.
PROBLEM WITH THE CONTEXT AND NATURE OF STANDARD
Standards
movement is viewed as a one-size-fits all approach (Ohanian, 1999). Those
holding this view think that all students should learn the same things in the
same way, at the same place, and get tested on the standardized tests.
One-size-fits all
approach is indeed problematic. Children learn and develop in highly individual
and idiosyncratic ways.
B.
PROBLEMS WITH TOP-DOWN VERSUS BOTTOM-UP STANDARDS
The
differences about who should develop and
enforce the standards. Fitzgerald (1979), Revitch (1995) stated some believe that
standards should be nationally produced and nationally assessed. They believe
that schooling in the United States, which has no national curriculum, would be
strengthened greatly by national standards enforced with national tests as they
are in France, Great Britain, China, and Japan.
Many
argue that state education departments are the most appropriate to take on
national development and assessment.
Many
school reformers argue against standards imposed from afar. They prefer only
standard-setting effort that are local. They believe that local,
context-conversations about teaching, students, and their work are the most
effective mechanism for deep instructional change (Sizer, 1995).
C.
PROBLEMS WITH TESTING AND ACCOUNTABILITY
Establishing
standards does not guarantee that the standards will be translated into
practice or that people will use them in ways that lead to better teaching and
learning. Neither does establishing standards guarantee that the standard will
be achieved.
Standards-based
performance test, which made up of multiple-choice, fill in the blank,
true-false items, are a significant improvement to test students’ knowledge,
skills; and understanding. However, 25 states that claim to be implementing new
standards still use old style-norm-reference tests (Education U.S.A., 1999)
1.
Assessing New Standards with Old Tests
New
standards are still being assessed by old tests because the test development is
expensive and the nature of standards-based performance tests remain
unchanged-to evaluate in norm-reference ways.
2.
Technical Problems in Test Development Undermine Public Trust
First
the problem of reliability of the assessment.
Second
the accuracy and the validity of the test results. An error in the scoring in
New York City’s 1999 reading tests lowered the test score to below “passing”.
Thousands of students are incorrectly barred from moving on the next grade.
3.
High-Stakes Testing Causes Harm
High
test scores have always reaped rewards for students in the form of placement in
high tracks or groups or actual dollar rewards or free or reduced college
tuition (National Center for Fair and Open Testing, 1999).
Low
test scores are facing unprecedented “tough” consequences for their
performance. “No promotion” for students who do not meet the proficiency
standard set as passing for their tests (International Reading Association,
1999; Koretz, 1996; Linn, 1996; Madaus, 1989; National Council on Education,
Standards, and Testing, 1992).
4.
Sanctions and Reward Increasing for Teachers and Schools Based on Students
Tests Scores
Many
states and districts are tying salary increases
to the student test scores of individual teachers.
Teachers
and principals can be reassigned if their schools do not perform well on
district tests. Low-performing schools are closed, teachers and administrators
are removed, then the schools are reopened with the new name; and with new
cadre of teachers and administrators (the new cadre are only for two or three
years to bring up the score or lose their position).
D. INTENDED AND UNINTENDED NEGATIVE
CONSEQUENCES OF HIGH-STAKES TESTS
1.
Teaching to the Test
Standard-
based approach influenced teachers to focus on whatever is thought to raise
test scores rather than on instruction aimed at addressing individual student
needs (Jones & Whitford, 1997, p 277)
The
test-related sanctions and rewards for teachers have created temptation for
school personel to cheat or to manipulate test results (Clotfeller& Ladd,
1996: Darling-Hammond, 1997; Smith & Rottenberg, 1991)
2.
Fueling Racial and Class Antagonisms
Standard-
based approach has barred children who are less affluent, who are minority, who
are in special education from attending schools in the most affluent
(prosperous) districts.
3.
Teacher-Proofing Instructional Programs
Standard-
based approach has made teachers pace their instruction according to district
mandates (high test scores) rather than in response to the students’ needs.
They even abandoned their teaching practices that have been nationally
recognized and recommended.
4.
Investing in Testing Rather Than Teacher Learning
Standard-
based approach has made some districts invest their limited money on testing
rather than on helping teachers to be better teachers by learning how to teach
in more effective ways.
5. Relying on the
Results of Only One Test as the Basis for High-Stakes Decisions
Requiring
only one way to demonstrate standards threatens to leave behind those who are
best able to demonstrate what they know and can do in diverse or divergent
ways. We must have flexibility in our assessment.
F.
THE NEED FOR STANDARDS FOR OPPORTUNITIES TO LEARN
If
we want students to learn more, we should not spend much of our time and money
on testing.
Opportunity
to learn standards have to do with ensuring that all students have equal and
adequate fiscal resource and access to well-prepared and fully qualified
teachers, as well as access to high quality curricula, instructional materials,
technologies (Baratz-Snowden, 1993; Darling-Hammond, 1991, 1993, 1994b, 1995,
1997; Darling-Hammond & Falk, 1997) . Attention to educational system ,
health and social environment are needed to allow individuals to reach their
potentials( Boyer, 1995; Jackson, 1993).
G. OPPOSITION GROWS TO HIGH-STAKEDS
USES OF STANDARDS AND STANDARDS-BASED TESTS
Parents,
civil right activists and educators object to the increasing standardization of
the curriculum in the name of standards and to the degree that districts and
states are relying on test scores for making decision about student promotion
and high school graduation.
H.
CHANGING THE COURSE OF STANDARDS-BASED APPROACH
Standards
can either support more ambitious-teaching and greater levels of success for all students, or they can serve to create
higher rates of failure for those who are already least well-served by
education system.
Students
need to be the center of all our school improvement efforts.
|
Helpful
Standards
|
Harmful
Standards
|
|
Improving the quality
of teaching
|
Equate harder with
better
|
|
Articulate core ideas
and critical skills
|
Focus on retention of
prescribed, disconnected facts and skills
|
|
Formulate “reasonable
expectations”
|
Required specific
skills and competencies
|
|
Serve as a means for
educational stakeholders to developed shared meaning and common expectations
|
Serve as a means for
disciplinary experts to assert the importance of their respective fields
|
|
Are assessed through
multiple standards-based performance tasks
|
Are assessed through
multiple-choice, norm-referenced, standardized tests that emphasize the
skills and factcs
|
|
Are supported by
teaching and assessments
|
Are accompanied by
teaching and assessments that emphasize one “right way” and one “right
answer”
|
|
Promote teaching that
is responsive how to how students learn
|
Promote teaching that
emphasizes conveying information and covering content
|
|
Use assessment
results as one of many sources of evidence to inform instruction,
|
Use assessment
results as the sole basis for making decisions about what group or track
students should be placed in
|
|
Are accompanied by
standards for the opportunities to
learn-
|
Focus exclusively on
content and performance standards for students
|
REFERENCES
Brown,
H.D. 2000. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. San Fransisco, Longman.
Richard
Amato. Patricia A. 2005. Academic Success
For English Language Learners. New York, Longman.
Wardhaugh,
Ronald. 2006. An Introduction to
sociolinguistics. Australia, Blackwell Publishing.
