My views on EQAO PROVINCE-WIDE TESTS: THE POWER OF GOOD INFORMATION

Document Reflection

http://www.eqao.com/pdf_e/11/Cpogi_ne_0211_WEB.pdf

Educational Quality and Accountability Office. (2011). EQAO’s Province-Wide Test:        

The Power of Good Information. Retrieved from http:www.eqao.com/pdm_e/11Cpogi_ne_0211_WEB.pdf

              In this blog posting, I have decided to reflect upon the Ontario Quality and Accountability Office (EQAO) document, EQUAO’s Pronvince-Wide Testing: Power of Good Information because EQAO testing impacts my teaching practice and professional duties.  It is obvious that this document has been produced for the general public as it provides a rationale for EQAO testing, outlines the responsibilities of school boards, gives an overview of different EQAO tests which are administered at different grade levels, and promotes the supposed successes of testing.  The document is littered with phrases that serve this purpose, which include the following:

• “The public education system is accountable to the public”;
• “Each question on every EQAO test is based on learning expectations set out in The Ontario Curriculum, which is what teachers are responsible for teaching in classrooms every day”
•  “Teaching the curriculum is preparing students for the test”
•  “EQAO is an independent audit of the Ontario curriculum, and if you are

   teaching the curriculum in the proper order, at the proper rate, at the proper

   depth – your students will do well.

• “Continuous improvement by constant transparency and reliable data”

This guide may be viewed as a piece of promotional ‘propaganda’ because it presents EQUAO testing in a positive light by addressing its apparent benefits and addressing expected critiques.  As a member of the general public, it would be difficult to argue against claims of accountability, continuous improvement, and transparency; however, as a teacher, I do “take issue” with some of the statements listed above.  The document’s claim that “teaching the curriculum” is preparing students for the test” does not necessarily hold true or provide a full picture of EQAO test preparation. From my experiences as an Ontario English teacher, I can attest to the fact that preparing students for the EQAO literacy test goes beyond simply “teaching the curriculum”, but to implementing lessons that teach students required skills for the test, having students write practice tests, assessing practice tests, as well as holding in-school and afterschool workshops for weaker students. I personally know of one teacher who creates her grade 10 Applied English exam in the same format as the EQAO literacy test, with multiple choice, news report, short answer, and essay-writing components.

In this regard, teachers are teaching to the test despite statements to the contrary. Oxford, Gray, and Ozga (2005) write that  90% of English teachers in both English and Scottish school systems, which have their own EQAO-type body known as QAE, warned that ‘public ranking of schools leads to teaching to the test.”  The EQAO document leaves out the fact that “continuous improvement by constant transparency and reliable data” by publishing school results is unhealthy, unfair, and leads to competition among schools as opposed to collective responsibility – a characteristic of the Fourth Way (Shirley, 2009).

          I also take issue with document’s statement that if one teaches “the curriculum in the proper order, at the proper rate, at the proper depth – your students will do well.” This statement does not hold true as students with learning disabilities and ESL students have an obvious disadvantage.  Furthermore, this above statement ignores the “role of factors such as poverty and social disorganization on learning” (Shirley, 2011, p. 205).  Finally, I have a problem with this statement because it places all the responsibility for students’ success on the test on the shoulders of the teachers – if the teacher is doing his or job properly, the students should experience no difficulty. Again, this statement ignores socio-economic factors that affect test results.  This statement is problematic because it seems as if there is a distrust of teachers’ professionalism within the system, and that this test is a way to ensure that teachers are teaching properly.

Works Referenced

Croxford, L., Gray, J., & Ozga, (2009). J. Teacher Attitudes to Quality Assurance and

Evaluation (QAE) in Scotland and England. The Briefing Reports. (51).

Shirley, D. (2011). The Fourth Way of technology and change.  Journal of Educational

                          Change. (12), 187-209.