Getting rid of EQAO

[Frank Loreto]

Any feelings about doing away with EQAO? This has become a monster tail wagging the dog of education. If the Ministry is looking to save money (given these lean days) then eliminating EQAO would be a good place to start

[I Murasak]

The tale wagging the dog of education are the teachers' unions not the EQAO. The public needs the transparency, especially in light of financial scandals, Lotto scandals, etc. we need to know how the system is educating students. So
Considering it has taken 10 years to get marginal improvement, the dog of education is fat and won't budge without a leash.

[Gay Stephenson]

There's certainly room for a great deal of debate around EQAO testing. While the testing is costly and time consuming for students and teachers, it does provide a standard measurement of how students are faring across the province. This can be reassuring to parents and also provide schools themselves with a snapshot on student achievement in math, reading and writing.

But does every school need to be tested each year? Are there more cost effective ways of accomplishing similar results? Could students be tested every other year? Could a random sample of students across the province be tested each year? And could the money that is saved be put into school programs and resources?

One of my concerns is that EQAO testing is becoming the most important measure of a school. Personally I find this wrong. There are many more things to consider (but they are not as simple to measure). Things like: are there art and music programs for all students, is there a fully functioning school library with a qualified teacher-librarian, are there after school programs, are parents included in school activities, is there a daycare in the school, are students engaged in learning, does the school have good administrative leadership, is there a positive relationship between the school and the community? All these things matter too.

The other thing to keep in mind about EQAO Grades is that they are recorded in levels, with Level 1 representing a low passing grade. Ontario sets Level 3, (70% to 79% or “B”) as the provincial standard. In Alberta the provincial standard is measured as a simple “pass” or 50%+.

In 2006/07, with the exception of Grade 9 Applied Mathematics, over 90% of students passed all EQAO tests in Ontario.

[Frank Loreto]

Transparency? Exactly how much does the EQAO cost to run each year? Does anyone actually know? This should include the cost of making, running and marking the tests results as well as the salaries of those involved. As far as that shot against the teachers unions....if it weren't for the teachers' union in our board, the teacher- librarians would have been removed by now. The Ministry has been silent on this issue for years.

[Sheila Stewart]

You have stated all my questions and concerns, Gay. I sense that many parents are questioning the value of the testing. We really do need to ask just what the cost adds up too as well. I have also wondered about the yearly schedule.

At the "Do Marks Matter" session at the conference it touched on the "system" information that standardized testing may give, but not really much information for an individual student's assessment and learning. I feel there is too much emphasis on improving these "system" results and the stress does funny things! Are we staying focused on each student enough, or are we pushing too hard for a bigger end result? Fine if these are a snapshot, but I think the results are easily misintrepreted and perhaps too many decisions are based on them.....and then a school or class "profile" can change a lot in one year.....so how do we compare or really know if adjustments in instruction made the difference?

I am not too sure if parents consider this: It is mandatory for schools and boards to administer these tests, but it is not mandatory for parents to make sure their kids take these tests or attend school on those days (elementary level). I know this, and have done it discreety without any negative consequences.

The format and delivery of the tests have changed a lot since they started, and I have been encouraged. But I still think too much has been caught up in it all (including classroom time "teaching to the test"!) It's nice to have precise scores and data to guide instruction, but is it enough? Some things can't be measured in such statistical ways, but are no less important or worthy of time.

[Lisa Robertson]

EQAO had it's time, but is this really a true measure of student success? I have heard that some schools have manipulated these tests and provided answers to students so that the school had an overall above average rating. There is no suprise element to this testing and I do not believe they have any true representation of our students learning abilities. One test cannot determine an overall picture of what level student's are at and whether they are meeting a "Provincial Standard". There are better ways this money can be spent and better data that can provide the REAL PICTURE.

[I Murasak]

The testing measures whether students in Ontario can read, write, and do math contained in the Ontario curriculum at an acceptable standard. Of course it doesn't measure all those other nice fuzzy things that students do in school--it's NOT supposed to. Considering that EQAO has done a pretty good job of reporting what it was mandated to do and has drastically reduced its costs, I'd say it's a bargain compared to what we had before. The EQAO's yearly budget of about $22M is a drop in the bucket compared to the total education tab.

For decades the public complained about the lack of basic skills in our young people and the fact that in many cases they were almost non-employable. Yet the public education industry kept telling us that the kids were OK, when parents and employers knew otherwise. We finally have some transparency and who complains? Not parents and certainly not the public.

[I Murasak]

OK here's something just as ridiculous. Why in 2006-07 did the 4 teachers' unions in Ontario get a whopping total of $18,904,321 for operating grants from the Govt of Ontario compared to the $28M the EQAO got to operate that same year (notice it's now down to $22M). Who's taking $$$ out of public education??? If it was for research, then that's a lot of papers....or was it an election year?

[Ruth Baumann]

In 2006, the Ontario Teachers' Federation and the four teachers' unions received significant grants from the provincial government to deliver relevant professional development to teachers. The teachers' organizations have a long history of providing quality professional learning experiences for their members, and were funded by the Harris government from 1999-2001 to deliver summer institutes for teachers. Professional learning that is collegial,and focussed on practical classroom applications is often the most effective.

One example of a project funded with government money is "Safe at School" - a website, resources and teacher workshop model designed to increase student safety and reduce bullying. You can see this site at http://www.safeatschool.ca.

I Murasak is incorrect when he describes these funds as "operating". They were not used in any way to support the normal or continuing work of the teachers' federation or teachers' organizations. They were used for resources, conferences, seminars and learning experiences.

I was the Secretary-Treasurer of the Ontario Teachers' Federation at the time, and I can assure you that the funds were used responsibly for the purposes agreed upon.

[I Murasak]

Thank you Ruth. It is good to know that professional development was the purpose of the funding. The "operating" description is Ministry of Finance's terminology.
I certainly think that using EQAO testing to improve teaching and learning is the goal of having assessment in the first place.

[Tanya Weiner]

Read this article - I have always been against this type of testing as it destroys education in the classroom, crams the kids head full of "stuff for the test" until the do a mental dump on the page for 4 days. But what did they learn? How to cram for a test!!

Hamilton Spectator


Too much testing hurts education Schools need to spend less time and
money on tests, more on instruction


Tue 17 Feb 2009


Opinion
Ken Durkacz
The Hamilton Spectator
Parents, it's time you had a serious look at the test-driven education
that your children are
experiencing and ask yourself: Is this good for them?


Is this a productive way to spend their days in school? How does it make
them feel about going to
school and about education in general?


Let's start with EQAO testing. When these tests were first introduced,
teachers were told that they would be but one of many ways students were
assessed. How untrue that proved to be. One only needs to examine how
utterly obsessed the school boards have become with the results of all
EQAO tests.


I wonder if the public has any idea about the amount of time, energy and
resources schools have been forced to dedicate to the god of testing --
hours of in-class preparation, special resource teachers, officials from
the ministry sent to "assist" schools who are not doing well ...


Of course, some of the blame for this obsession on test results falls on
the media, this newspaper among the guilty parties. The amount of space
devoted to the results, which include comparisons between public and
Catholic boards, and the ranking of schools within each board, places
far too much emphasis on a test that was once meant to be one tool among
many to help assess students.


Boards now feel intense pressure to improve their results, to prove that
they are providing quality education, so they don't lose students to the
"other side." Media scrutiny only serves to legitimize the EQAO testing
procedure.


And what of this procedure? All students are subjected to the same test.
All students must use the
HB pencil, the blue ink pen. They must write the essay. They can't write
a dialogue or script a film scene or do any other creative activity that
might help them to convey they have acquired the knowledge they are
meant to express on the test. They must obey the carefully crafted rules
on test day.


Imagine, parents, the way your Grade 3 student must feel when they look
for some assistance on a question with which they have a problem. The
person who has been there for them all year long, the person they trust
to help them when they get stuck, tells them that they can't offer any
help.


What a confusing message!


What an unsupportive atmosphere! And this is the ultimate evaluation
tool our board has come to rely upon.


I also wonder if parents have any idea how often their children are
tested and ranked.
EQAO testing in Grades 3 and 6, EQAO math testing in Grade 9, EQAO
literacy testing in Grade 10.
Students in elementary schools are also tested and ranked in each grade
with DRA (Developmental
Reading Assessment) testing done twice per year.


"Running records" for the DRA tests are done each month. Math
assessments are done in Grades 2 and 5. There are also plans for a math
literacy initiative and, of course, more testing.


Now the school board has introduced three SEF (school effectiveness
framework) cycles a year in
which students are tested, work scrutinized and then tested again in a
six-week cycle.
You can imagine the time and energy required to implement these cycles.
No wonder enthusiasm has
disappeared from the classroom.


Then there are the costs. It's estimated that the overall annual cost in
this province for EQAO testing is between $50 million and $60 million.
Whew! That number is an estimate because the Ministry of Education won't
reveal the actual costs.


Imagine if that money were taken from the tests and reinvested in the
classroom. When money for schools is always in demand, how does the
government justify this expense?


It is time for the McGuinty government to revisit this approach. The
costs alone should dictate this, to say nothing of the negative impact
these tests have had on our education system in general.


In a society becoming increasingly multicultural, in a world changing at
an exponential rate, where people are increasingly being asked to be
creative and think outside the box, how do these traditional tests help
us to develop the kind of adults who will fit into this world?


They don't. They only reinforce the strong student and demoralize the
weaker student. They offer no flexibility, no chance for a student to
show his or her stuff. That's not progress.


Parents, the time has come for you to speak up. If you are unhappy with
the test-driven nature of education today, say something, do something.
Call your local trustee. More importantly, call your MPP. Let them know
how you feel.


Let them know you'd like them to spend more money in the classroom and
less on testing, testing, testing.


The ministry is now pushing for "differentiated instruction," evidence
they are at least partly ready to move in a different and positive
direction. Let's give the McGuinty government the incentive they need to
end the oppression of the test.


Ken Durkacz is a secondary school teacher. He lives in Hamilton.


(c) 2009 Torstar Corporation

[I Murasak]

I hope they "cram" for the test every single day. The test assesses specifically what is contained the curriculum. If they haven't learned what's in the curriculum--then what's the point? If they need to "cram", then I question what is happening in the classroom.

I think more anxiety is created by the educators than by the kids.

[I Murasak]

How about if parents had a lot of choices in schools?