high-stakes testing and the incentive to cheat

     Over the past few weeks the hotly debated issue of high-stakes standardized testing has been discussed. These tests were implemented as part of the No Child Left Behind Act in 2002, which demanded accountability for teachers and schools. A potentially major design flaw is that based on the results of these tests, schools were either financially rewarded or punished by removal of funds and probationary statuses. As part of our past discussions non this subject, we have primarily focused on the advantages argument that the tests promote higher standards of learning and identify under-performing schools, and on the negatives argument that it forces teachers to "teach to the test" and doesn't accurately measure all forms of learning.  I propose one aspect we haven't touched on yet, as suggested in the bestselling book "Freakonomics": the incentive these tests create for teachers to cheat. 
     Let's look at the incentive further. The teacher can be financially rewarded or punished based on the performance of her students (ie: given or refused a raise/promotion). Additionally, if her school is put on probation for its failure to meet these testing standards, she stands to lose her job, should the school be closed down. 
    The authors of the book reference a  study that examined the results of standardized tests from the Chicago Public School system over 7 years, and by analyzing the answers and the corresponding student profile, detect cheating had occurred in over 200 classrooms per year in the district, which, by a conservative estimate, was 5% of the total per year. A survey of teachers in North Carolina revealed that 35% of teachers responded that they had witnessed a colleague cheating.  The study in Chicago was reinforced with a follow-up re-test that involved the half the suspected cheating teachers' classrooms and half of the best teachers' classrooms as the control group. The drastic decline in students' performance on the re-test indicated which teachers had cheated on the original standardized test. These teachers were fired. 
     My point in relating all of this is that perhaps evaluations of NCLB and high-stakes testing needs to give more attention to the incentive of cheating as a negative aspect of such testing. I recognize that it may not be a major issue any longer in this decade, however, I find the study executed by the economists in this book to be very interesting and noteworthy. I suppose it is also a note of caution to us as future teachers, fallible human beings that we are, with innate tendencies to respond to incentives, to recognize the harm and disservice we would be doing to our students to fabricate their achievements on these standardized tests, no matter what judgments we hold about such testing methods. 
    Admittedly, I was surprised at first when I read that chapter of the "Freakonomics" book.  How bold of those teachers to cheat for their students on those standardized tests!  Upon further consideration, I realized that it makes sense, in a way, that they would. The pressure, the offer of bonuses, their future job stability; and the risk of getting caught was relatively low, so why not try it, if you were so desperate?
       I anticipate there to be immense pressure on me as a teacher for my students to score as high as possible on such tests. I know it will be tempting to "teach to the test", possibly give them answers or solutions to types of problems without teaching them how to solve them themselves, and even possibly to fill in any blanks left. However, I intend to remind myself that while these tests are theoretically important, they are not the determinants for the future, nor are they fair assessments (as currently designed). I know in my heart that it is much more important for me to see that my students have learned via alternative creative measures of their comprehension. I also subscribe to a sense of morality in which cheating is wrong, no matter my personal views on the justice and fairness of such standardized tests. I will have to be mindful and maintain a degree of self-awareness to achieve a balance between adequately preparing my future students for a narrowly-focused test, and teaching them subjects, ideas, strategies and ways of thinking that will benefit them in their lives. 

Dubner, Stephen J., Steven D. Levitt. "Freakonomics." New York, New York. 2009 p.22-34