The Ambiguity of Teaching to the Test Standards

1. INTRODUCTION
EQUITY
Schools have been a major arena in efforts to build a more equitable society.
In fact, some have argued that the biggest problem American schools face is
not overall poor performance, but inequity as reflected in the disparity of
educational outcomes between rich and poor children and minorities and
the White majority (Berliner & Biddle, 1995). With the Brown v. Board of
Education decision in 1957, schools became a central tool for eliminating
desegregation. It quickly became clear that desegregating schools did not
ensure equal outcomes in terms of achievement, access to higher education,
or high-paying jobs.
Equity has always been a central issue in discussions of standards and assessments.
From the beginning, advocates of strong standards have argued
that if fairly administered, such standards could become a key to equity by
ensuring that all children had access to the same curriculum and equally
skilled instruction (O’Day & M. S. Smith, 1993). Indeed, the NCTM’s first
principle in its revised standards is that excellence in mathematics requires
high expectations and strong support for all students (NCTM, 2000).
In practice, however, state standards and assessment systems have not always
had the intended results. The effects of Texas’ program in particular,
though debated, have been widely criticized as reducing equity in access to
intellectually challenging instruction and in educational achievement. In
that state and elsewhere, researchers have argued that the quality of instruction
has deteriorated after higher standards, new tests, and strong sanctions
were introduced. The result has been that content taught was limited to
what was tested, instructional materials began to mimic test items, and
teachers spent much of their time on preparing students for the test. Such
findings have been used to argue that changing state testing systems and incentives
will not promote equity without simultaneously providing adequate
resources in schools serving poor and minority children (McNeil,
2000). In some other states, the achievement gap between White and minority
students has been reduced, but rarely, if ever, has it been eliminated.
These failures of standards to achieve greater levels of equity may reflect
a number of factors. One is the difficulty of getting adequate resources and
substantively changing instructional practice in schools serving poor and
minority students. Another is popular sentiment whereby most adults see
education as a way to help their children get ahead and therefore are loath
to invest heavily in policies that would help children from poor urban
schools do better in school or the job market (Labaree, 2000).
In some circumstances, higher standards may contribute to educational
equity, but only if those standards prompt teachers to consider new content,
delivered in new ways. When teachers learn how to give students the opportunity
to study important content in classrooms that are conducive to learning
and in ways that promote deep understanding, students can display
9