Testing is Hurting Creativity in Classrooms

RCEd Commentary

Every year, millions of students across the country begin the school year knowing they have to take standardized exams in the spring. Students have to prepare by studying for core subjects such as math, English, history and science, but often after the holidays, class time is increasingly spent preparing for these standardized tests than actually learning more about the subject, decreasing their opportunity to continue to think critically and creatively. It's time to approach a new way to assess student learning and teacher effectiveness.

In the era of accountability-driven testing, these high-stakes tests hold a profound effect not just on students, but also on educators. Standardized testing for grades 3-8 has largely been reduced to multiple choice or short answer formats, and just 2 percent of math questions and 21 percent of English questions on these exams test higher-level skills like analysis, according to a recent Rand study. Synthesis and analytical skills, among others, are necessary for college and career readiness. And when a student scores on these tests are applied to teacher evaluations, our schools are transformed from institutions of learning to "test prep" mills.

This type of year-end testing commonly referred to as a summative seeks both to assign accountability and quantify learning. It's a process that takes a look at the overall knowledge base of a child for awarding credit and ensuring educator effectiveness.

Instead of this approach, educators should be encouraged to focus on performance-based formative assessments leading to lower emphasis on "test prep" for summative high stakes tests. Teachers should ask a series of questions to gauge a student's understanding of the material: What did they understand from the lesson? How did they go about resolving the problem presented? This type of assessment fosters a more conducive environment for learning through critical thinking. To truly cultivate an environment where our students are effectively learning to be creative and think critically, our notion of assessment has to change.

A report released by SCOPE, "Creating Systems of Assessment for Deeper Learning," illustrates an imbalance between formative and summative assessment in a graphic offered by Paul Leather of New Hampshire, a lead state in the needed transformation, showing that the current ratio is 70 -80% summative assessment which will move to a new paradigm of 70-80% formative versus summative.

"Bubble in" high stakes testing also forces students into memorization exercises and "test-gaming skills" instead of developing their ability to think critically through a problem to develop multiple solutions - a key to success in the workplace. In the real world, there are few absolutes. Employers want creative problem solvers who can come up with innovative, new solutions to issues. But, we're stuck in an antiquated age where we channel all school of thinking to one right answer - A, B, C or D.

While there's no simple solution to this problem, we can implement better teaching models, curricula and tools to nurture the creative process for children early in their education. This all begins with a positive environment in which students are allowed to take an interactive part in the learning process to stimulate the brain. The following are a few ways to engage students and their creativity:

• Hands-on education: Most children tend to best absorb information when they can see and feel the subject matter in a playful, student led manner with teachers as coaches. What's written or drawn on a whiteboard isn't processed by all students the same way.
• Teacher feedback: The teacher must create an environment in which she/he can engage in a dialogue with children about how they absorbed the material and what they've learned. 
• 21st Century skill Sets: There are certain skill sets (creativity, critical thinking and problem solving, collaboration and communication) that are essential for success in the future. Increasingly, mastery of these skills is the greatest predictor of employability in future economies.
• Educational Content: The material being taught in the classroom must be rich and relevant. It should be content students will find interesting and it should relate to the world in which they live. 

Therefore, teachers should be evaluated not by exams, but by a multiple-point scale delivered by the school district. A point-based evaluation would measure the teacher's ability to instruct on the fundamentals including competency of the material, classroom management, and creative presentation of the material to drive engagement with students on a regular basis. Testing will always be around, but it's how educators approach these exams that will provide an assessment of both student and teacher.

We've been measuring mediocre outcomes based on memorization. If we're going to value creative problem solvers in tomorrow's workforce, then modifying our current testing framework is a monumental shift that will drive much needed change in how we are teaching in the classroom. Standardized testing should be used as a tool to measure a child's progress, not solely their success or failure and that of their teacher. Ultimately, the teaching process should be about ensuring that kids learn the content and skills to be successful as they advance.

What happens outside of school in life is therefore dependent on what we do inside the classroom. Will educators change their teaching methods or will we continue to see creativity stifled by the cycle of memorization that leads to mediocrity? The choice is ours.