As Texas legislators consider changes to the state’s student assessment and school accountability policies, there are some key points to consider. A single annual test, based on Texas state standards for what students should know and be able to do at each grade level, is essential to fairly and clearly understand how well students are learning in our public schools. Similarly, a strong accountability system, anchored on student learning outcomes, is critical to understanding how well districts and campuses are preparing students for their next step – whether that is the next grade, college, the military, or the workforce.
The job of policymakers and educators is to use the data and information from the test and the accountability system to make changes, reallocate resources, and, if needed, enforce consequences, so that all Texas kids have access to a great education.
What kind of test is best? Criterion-referenced vs. norm-referenced:
The Legislature is discussing two types of tests, criterion-referenced and norm-referenced. These tests may look quite similar, but there are some key differences in how the tests are scored and the data they provide about how well students are learning.
- Criterion-referenced assessments, like STAAR, measure student performance against learning standards established by the state. These assessments focus on whether a student has mastered specific knowledge or skills and is performing at grade-level. Students are measured against the standards, not against each other.
- Nationally norm-referenced assessments, like the SAT, compare a student’s knowledge or skills to the performance of other students taking the same test and assign them a percentile ranking. These assessments do not indicate whether students have mastered specific learning standards. Students are measured against each other, not on what they know or can do.
Criterion-referenced assessments are the strongest choice for K-12
Federal law requires that each state administer a single statewide assessment to all students in third through eighth grades and another in high school to determine whether they are performing at grade level based on the state’s standards. In exchange for giving the annual test, the Department of Education provides states with Title I funds, which are federal formula grants designated to support learning for the lowest-performing students in high poverty schools. Texas receives over $1.8 billion in Title I funds each year.
In 2018, the U.S. Department of Education informed Arizona that its plan to implement a menu of norm-referenced assessments was illegal and would result in the revocation of these federal funds.
Criterion-referenced tests, like STAAR, are grounded in Texas learning standards and tell you whether a student is performing at grade level. Nationally norm-referenced assessments are based on national standards rather than Texas learning standards, and they don’t provide information about student proficiency.
The federal requirement that all students are tested every year using a single statewide assessment means that we have an apples-to-apples comparison of how well students are learning across school and district lines. Moving away from a single statewide assessment like STAAR to a menu of assessments would not only fail to meet federal requirements, but it would keep policymakers from having meaningful information to understand how well kids are learning across the state.
It’s impossible to compare the outcomes of the kids in Midland to the kids in Harlingen to the kids in Houston if every district uses different tests. Without a common assessment, policymakers, parents, and educators must rely on averages and anecdotes, which miss many children. Annual exams like STAAR mean that every child is seen in our public system and that all parents can see directly if their child is on track.
Strong systems of accountability focus on student academic performance
National research shows that states with accountability systems that primarily focus on student academic outcomes – like Florida, Louisiana, and Mississippi – have higher outcomes on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) math and reading assessments.
Today, too many states have watered-down accountability systems thanks to waivers and compromises. States should avoid the temptation to use measures for accountability that distract from academic progress, particularly input measures (e.g., student-to-staff ratios or school climate survey results), and keep the focus on student learning. They should limit other measures to those that indicate college, career, and military readiness along with performance in subjects beyond math, science, and English-language arts.
