On 6/28/09, rich wrote:
> Standardized test: measures knowledge which can be normed against a
> standard. Tests the content taught in schools. Are made common
> knowledge. Scores are sometimes made public. Much time is spent
> preparing students. The ultimate goal is for all students to do
> well.
A very... optimistic view of standardized academic tests. Not
necessarily accurate, but optimistic.
>
> Standardized interviews: measures judgements, values, beliefs, and
> reactions which cannot be accurately normed against a standard.
No. They can and are normed against a preferred standard for
judgements, values, beliefs, and reactions. This standardized interview
is to find people who share these beliefs, values, etc.
The
> content of the questions does not match the content taught as
> professional knowledge.
So what? Your values and beliefs are still fair game in determining
whether you are a good fit for a position. If you believe that the
teacher is the most important person in the classroom, then you will do
poorly on the TI interview. If you believe that content matters more
than students, then you will do poorly on the TI interview. If you
believe that there should not be significant differentiation,
modifications, and adaptations for all kinds of learners, including
those protected under IDEA, then you will do poorly on the TI interview.
If you believe that the content integrity and the academic rigor
involved in "Algebra I" or "US History" will not allow you to make
significant changes to the curriculum to help all kinds of students
learn, then you will do poorly on the TI interview. You are not the
kind of teacher this district wants, if they subscribe to this service,
and they have a right to screen people based on those educational values
they hold.
> They are kept secret, and the people taking
> them are not allowed to know their score. There is no preparation
> allowed. The ultimate goal is for only a few to perform well.
The ultimate goal is for the district to find the kind of "student
centered" educator that it wants. Of course, I am aware of two
districts in particular that have TI, but are not student centered in
any way. Oh, they have a "student centered" mission statement, like
everyone, but their practices are much more institutional and educator
centered. TI is counterproductive, but it is used, and they have had
high turnover rates because of it. One of these districts I know about
has abandoned TI as part of an overhaul of its hiring practices. The
other has not, and will continue really, really believe that they're
student centered when they are not. They will then spend another year
scratching their heads as to why many of their new teachers quit or are
fired, and wonder why on Earth they don't work out when they score so
well on TI.
> While we strive to eliminate as much bias as possible from
> standardized tests because they are mandatory, the TI is completely
> designed to discriminate against something.
No, standardized tests "discriminate" against people who get the wrong
answers. Also, its interesting you said "we strive to eliminate..."
Have you ever been involved in the development of a standardized test?
"We" actually don't really strive to eliminate much bias at all. They
are still written largely by middle-upper class, highly educated,
English-speaking, white people who have been middle class,
English-speaking, and white their whole lives, and their parents were
likely well educated. I've seen the panel in my state, at least the
last one we had, and it fit that bill, except for a token or two.
TI is designed to discriminate against certain teaching styles. Well,
that's not exactly true. Its designed to identify certain teaching
styles and educational philosophies, and then the district has to decide
if it would like to discriminate among candidates based upon that
information. Under the law, you can discriminate based upon teaching
style, BTW.
> And that something
> could be affected by cultural, race, or background.
And the onus would be upon the individual making that claim to prove it.
It COULD be affected by..., but you have no objective proof that it is.
You would also have to prove that if such tests have a cultural bias,
that they raise to the level of PROHIBITED discrimination.
> Would you like
> a fluently bilingual Chinese math teacher? Wouldn't that be a great
> asset to your math department?
No, not at all. My district has nearly no native Chinese speaking
students. The few we do have, speak English better than most native
speakers. Now, a fluent Spanish speaking math teacher (or any other
subject) would be worth their weight in gold.
Do you think the TI might present a
> little problem in hiring that person?
I'm yet to see data that proves that. As that the test data is
proprietary information, you would have to go to court and obtain a
subpoena to see such data to even to begin to make such a determination.
However, I can say that coming from the Special Education side, that TI
scores mean very little when you only have one applicant. If I need a
Chinese speaking bilingual special ed teacher, and I have one with
proper certificate, it won't matter if their SC score is 08, because I'm
hiring them any way. There likely aren't two applying.
The people who are usually worried about these things are the
lackluster, teacher-centered applicants in glutted fields.
> Is the TI an interview or a test? I think that is the legal
> question. If it is a test, and white males over 40 consistently get
> screened out, it's discriminatory and breaks federal law.
That's not your call, unless you're a federal judge or sitting on a
federal jury (which you should be barred from because you have personal
interest in the case). There are also a lot of "ifs" in your statement.
You would have to go to court and prove that a protected class is being
discriminated against, and that the protected class is being screened
out because of their characteristics as a protected class. For
instance, its likely that there are a larger percentage of white males
over 40, than say, white males under 40, would state that non-whites
should be educated apart from whites. Hopefully that percentage is very
low, but that opinion could be considered in hiring (or not hiring, as
the case may be) and you would have a hard time proving that such a
survey or scoring mechanism is discriminatory.
> I always, always do this, and it hasn't helped me. But it's still
> the only advice that I have ever heard.
Well, there are several options here. You may not be a student centered
educator. If you generally are teacher centered, or content centered,
which is one of the major things TI detects, then you really can't study
or lie your way out of it. Its really hard to change your core beliefs.
You can fudge a couple of questions, but its designed to find out what
you really think. If you really think that the most important thing in
the math room is the sacred text of Algebra, and not the kids, then its
hard to hide that.
Look, you can go round and round about "discriminatory tests" and
whatnot, but at the end of the day, its a way to find out if you're the
kind of teacher the district thinks it wants.
Without the politically correct BS, here's what most districts want:
Basically, that's a pliable, student centered teacher who will give a
special ed kid a D when he hasn't done anything the whole year. Its
someone who will differentiate and not teach to the middle of the class.
Its someone who will let a kid draw a picture of a main character, and
that earns a passing grade on a book report. Its someone who will fail
less than 5 percent of their students, in high school, and someone who
will not fail anyone except an extreme truant in MS and Elem. Its
someone who will do English test prep in History and follow the
curriculum they set forth, and happily take 2 days to teach the Civil
War in June while spending 2 months on Native American culture. Its
someone who will play ball and do whatever they're told. Its legal to
look for employees like that.
I don't like it anymore than you, but there you have it. My district is
going away from it, and good riddance. There will be some other bright
idea, test, screening to come, so the grass might not be greener.
> Is there an administrator version of the TI?
Yes. No, you can't have it.
