One of the areas of teaching that I’ve always struggled with has been motivation. I have tried to ask myself the hard questions: How do I motivate those students who have no intrinsic desire to learn or who have no personal interest in what I am trying to relate? What steps can I make? What will I not do to make this work – that is, what is off-limits for trying to motivate students? To date, I have not found easy answers, and I learn more and more that I must have a toolbox of ideas, not one trick to flip that proverbial switch from “unmotivated” to “motivated.”
I have also long been a critic of standardized testing (perhaps even before I decided on teaching as a career), with a rapidly growing (albeit somewhat morbid) fascination with the drive to use norm-referenced tests. (There’s a joke – although it’s not really a joke – about politicians who decry the fact that half of our students are below average: the punchline being, of course, that it is a mathematical certainty that half of any group will be “below average” because of group norms.) I tend to see the effects of standardized testing as destructive and antithetical to a profound approach to education, emphasizing lower-level thought (rote knowledge and memorization) and leaving little opportunity for higher-order thinking, such as analysis and synthesis. I don’t often feel the need to write about this because there are so many others who have written about the topic with greater evidence and precision that I possess.
So when I got my copy of the Illinois English Bulletin, the publication of the Illinois Association of Teachers of English (IATE, of which I am a member), I was interested to read an article entitled, “How Can Students Be Motivated to Do Well on Standardized Tests?” by Tisha Ortega. Unfortunately, Ortega’s approach was somewhat disappointing to me.
Ortega had me at the beginning, talking about one hypothetical student’s lack of motivation in some ways reflects on the school, who (with the teachers) will ultimately be responsible for low scores caused by low motivation. This is absolutely true, and it is the dark side of the “teacher accountability” that came with No Child Left Behind.
But what Ortega talks about when she talks about motivation are, in my opinion, methods that only support the flawed methodology of the standards-based assessment model. She talks about teacher incentives, which I am somewhat ambivalent about: yes, it’s a good idea to reward good teachers, but it’s counterproductive if the benchmarks for teacher rewards are tied to the standards which are trying to be improved.
Ortega also goes into some detail about schools that have tried student incentives: tying standardized tests into grades, with the possibility of a class trip for students who excel both on the tests and in their normal work (Linden High School in CA); scholarship incentives (Lansing, MI); and even money (New York City). She interjects quotes from teachers at various schools talking about these programs and how they help alleviate, as one teacher put it, the “uphill battle you have trying to get students to study for tests” and statistics of the sometimes nominal, sometimes significant success that these programs are having.
I don’t doubt that programs like this may in fact be winning the battle against standardized tests, but in my opinion, it is a Pyrrhic victory. In helping our students to succeed on standardized tests, what are we accomplishing? What do our students walk away from these tests with? Moreover, what have they learned from being motivated with these types of rewards?
The way that Ortega deals with some of these questions – where she does so – is alarming to me. For instance, she addresses some nebulous opposition to the Linden High School (CA) program:
Some criticize the program saying that if the tests were tied to something the students really cared about, the school wouldn’t need to bribe the students. It can be noted, however, the [sic] no one stated what that something was.
My concern is two-fold: 1) If we don’t know the nature of the complaint, how can we even evaluate this sort of criticism? 2) Even if it is true that there has been no definite answer provided on what these tests could be tied to that students really care about (and of course, the idea is really that the students should care about it because it is worth knowing), does that really justify the current system? Are we that unimaginative any more?
Finally, Ortega concludes with a word to those of us who are sitting in the back of the room wondering what’s wrong with this picture:
In an ideal world, students would be intrinsically motivated to do well on tests and would not need any incentives. But the reality is that teachers and schools are being held responsible for students’ performances on these tests. If students’ scores were always a reflection of their knowledge and preparation for the exam then accountability would be understandable. But in a less than ideal world where students don’t always try their best, money incentives appear to have some success, both in motivating teachers and students. No doubt, in the future more schools will be looking for financial ways to motivate their students. There also may be even stranger incentives on the horizon, as schools become even more desperate to improve students’ performances on standardized tests.
You don’t have to tell us that the world of education is not ideal – if it were, you wouldn’t be writing about student motivation (or standardized tests, for that matter). But the alternative to this “less than ideal” model is merely to acquiesce to its demands, not to find ways to promote authentic learning that in turn help students to do better on tests or even to get educators organized to help find this “less than ideal” trend of standards-based assessments. That, to me, is entirely objectionable when there are other manners in which teachers can make the best of a bad situation – or, better yet, try to fix the situation altogether.
I honestly am more saddened for the author than anything, merely because it does feel to me that she’s given in, or perhaps her educational philosophy is merely just different enough that this emphasis on extrinsic rewards doesn’t bother her as it does me (or possibly both). But I am convinced, no matter what we do to make the best out of NCLB, standardized testing, and the whole mess, the easy way is not the one that will ultimately be the most beneficial, and throwing money at a problem like this – especially when money is already a problem itself for most schools – sounds to me like the easy way out.
April 25, 2009 at 2:36 pm
Well argued! I’ll be adding a link to this post on my blog (http://theodawson.net.
Also, you might be interested in checking out the National Testing Survey (http://testingsurvey.us).
My first job was as a midwife. During 10 years in practice, I met over 500 newborns, all of whom were highly motivated learners. After years as a cognitive developmental psychologist, I still think the question we need to answer is what our culture and our schools are doing to destroy this natural motivation.
April 25, 2009 at 3:28 pm
[…] out this post at Docere est Discere (Musings on language and […]
April 28, 2009 at 8:13 pm
Standardized tests and test preparation don’t motivate students, especially those who do not see college as part of their futures. Unfortunately, with more college graduates than ever, many groups believe going to college is the correct path. According to Ruby Payne, students living in generational poverty value relationships and entertainment. Standardized tests go against those values; they’re depersonalized and boring.
I agree that Ortega’s tactics seem superficial, but these students probably ask “what’s in for me?” And, if they are not interested in attending college, what’s in it for them, in their eyes, is a test that will impact others’ lives and,taken together, possibly an entire school system more than it will impact theirs.
April 29, 2009 at 10:28 am
Your comment about generational poverty is right on the money, Amy. And of course students want to know what standardized tests do for them (actually, I think our attitude toward standardized testing might be somewhat of a reflection about our attitude toward assessment in general – “You’re going to take the test, whether you like it or not!”). The problem is that saying, “Here, have some money if you do well,” doesn’t really answer the question: it just provides a tangible goal. That’s a step up from what we’ve got, but it’s not a solution.
May 3, 2009 at 8:12 am
Please read “Reading Don’t Fix No Chevys” by Michael Smith and Jeff Wilhelm. They wanted to look at adolescent boys and their reading, and they were smart enough to ask questions beyond school: do these boys read? (yes) is it reading that is validated and affirmed by school? (no) why not? (longer answer required) what are these boys passionate about in their own lives? (video games) how can we learn from that as we plan literacy activities? (longer answer required)
If you can’t find a copy of the book, ask your friendly university supervisor if you can borrow his copy. I think it provides the best look at motivation for reading/literacy of anything that I know of.
July 8, 2010 at 10:38 am
Don’t be saddened for me! I actually do quite enjoy teaching and I am bothered by extrinsic rewards offered to students. However, I wanted to make a point about that those rewards appeared to have the most results in raising students’ scores. I was thought it was interesting to see what different school districts have tried with their students. My school district offers no such rewards. In my ideal world there would be no standardized testing at all.
July 14, 2010 at 6:29 am
Don’t misunderstand me, Tisha; I wasn’t making a comment about your satisfaction with teaching but rather about the tactics we must make through policies. I will say this, however: you make an interesting point about the effects, and if we are an educational system that gives lip service at least to the idea of research-based policies, then perhaps you’re right that we should be looking at this. On the other hand, there’s still part of me that says, “You know, this is fundamentally wrong. Education shouldn’t be like this.” I’m conflicted.
I’m glad, however, that we agree on standardized testing. I suppose I was a little too harsh to castigate based on the fact that this proposed incentive model would only reinforce the flawed system we have now.
Thanks for your comments – it’s not often I get an author who gives feedback on something.
February 16, 2011 at 3:57 pm
I’ve been spending some time reading your blog, and this post really resonates with me! I totally agree with your statement when you say, “standardized testing as destructive and antithetical to a profound approach to education, emphasizing lower-level thought (rote knowledge and memorization) and leaving little opportunity for higher-order thinking, such as analysis and synthesis.” I could not agree with you more. I am not a very good test taker myself, and it’s disappointing when a school uses standardized test scores as the main factor to determining whether a student is good enough for their school. What ever happened to the idea of being well-rounded?
Because you are a teacher and obviously involved in your school, I wanted to send you a quick note to let you know about an organization I am involved with called Boost Up. It’s a non-profit that encourages people to support kids in their quest for a high school diploma.
As I worked with Boost Up, I found out that the national dropout rate is now 31%, which is crazy to me. It looks like you’re located in the midwest, where the dropout rate is slightly lower, but wouldn’t it be great to bring that down even more?
I see that your blog talks a lot about your thoughts in and out of the classroom and it would be great if you wanted to mention Boost Up to your readers. Boost Up is a resource of information including national and local statistics, information on local schools, and provides people with information on how to help students and give them a Boost!
If you are interested in posting something, but don’t quite know what to say, I can certainly help you with that as well—I really believe in this cause. In any case, I really liked your blog and thought something like this would resonate with you where you might want to get involved. You can check out the site at http://www.boostup.org and I would love it if you could let your readers know how to give the students in their community a Boost.
Drop me a note back if you want some help putting a post together, though from what I see in your blog, your posts are quite engaging—I’d love to help however I can. I’ll keep an eye out for more posts from you as well—hope we can stay connected!
Regards,
Sara
April 22, 2012 at 3:18 am
gifts…
[…]Motivation and standardized testing « Docere Est Discere[…]…
May 1, 2014 at 3:54 am
Many thanks another beneficial website. Where else may well I get of which style of details written in a real best manner? I’ve a undertaking that we are simply right now concentrating on, and i also have already been at the watch out for similarly info.