Testing for Intelligence

Testing for Intelligence

             I believe establishing base lines for measuring student progress in school is important.  I also believe that a comprehensive, holistic process not just a single achievement test should be used.  In Pennsylvania, the tool used to measure student progress is the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA). This test has been used since 1999 and is based on the skills outlined in established standards for reading, writing, speaking and listening and mathematics. Every student in our state is tested in grades 3 through 8 and 11 is assessed in reading and math. Every student in grades 5, 8, and 11 are assessed in writing and every student in grades 4, 8 and 11 are assessed in science.  Please note ALL students.  The controversy lies in the appropriateness of the test for ALL students.  The outcomes reported from this battery of tests has huge implications for the schools involved.  Reading School District has a high percentage of dual language learners, many children living in severe poverty and a transient population.  In my opinion, these factors have influence the scores as a whole that are obtained.  The end result being sanctions to the school district which I feel only add to the problem.  In many classrooms, the teachers spend a great deal of time “teaching the test” rather than essential general knowledge.  The additional pressure put on the teachers that are already working at a disadvantage due to the overcrowded classrooms and limited resources seems unfair.

            Sternberg states that humans have multiple intelligences  that includes academic, creative and practical while psychologist suggest emotional intelligence has a part in the overall intelligence of each of us(Berger, 2009) That being said,  I believe  that intelligence should be measured using a variety of tools and methods.  I feel the use of only standardized tests to measure intelligence  does not provide the full picture of the child’s abilities and can give false  impressions which in turn can limit the educational opportunities a child  may have. 

             I also agree that intelligence changes over time due to many factors.  It should be measured numerous times in the child’s life and in a variety of ways that address all essential elements of intelligence, not just academics.

            This method of testing children is not universally practiced.  In Sweden, student progress takes in to account more than just the standardize tests that are administered.  The grades children earn throughout the school year are weighted heavily as well.   Frits Wigforss, an educational psychologist and measurement expert was instrumental in contributing to the revisions made in the assessment system in Sweden. He understood the limits of a standardized test system and also realized the impact that social elements had in the child’s life and their ability to be successful when taking standardized tests (Kilpatrick, J & Johansson, B., 1994). 

             To summarize, assessing the progress children make in school is important.  It helps to drive the instruction in the classroom which is all the more reason for more than just a single standardized test to be used.  In regards to PSSA’s, it is my opinion that the demands on the teacher to prepare their students to take the test often good teaching which is unfortunate.  

References

Berger, K. S. (2009). The developing person through childhood (5^th ed.). New York, NY: Worth      Publishers.

Kilpatrick, J. & Johansson, B. (1994). Standarized mathematics testing in Sweden: The legacy of Frits Wigforss. Nordic Studies in mathematics Education, Vol. 1, No. 1,6-30 . Retrieved     December 9, 2011 from https://ncm.gu/media