A Testing Program for Elementary Schools

Abstract

Most of us are agreed that tests, in order to produce the best results, must be given by teachers. Only in a few school systems can they be administered either by the superintendent in person or by some one acting for him. Simple tests, therefore, will be in greatest demand-tests which are easily administered, objectively rated, and quickly interpreted. Monroe's Standardized Silent Reading Test and Courtis' Standard Research Tests in Arithmetic have been widely used largely because they possess these characteristics of simplicity. The test-maker's art is most clearly revealed when he is able to devise tests which are not only simple but valid as measures of significant school abilities. The superintendent, therefore, who contemplates initiating a testing program, or even the continuance of one already begun but not carried forward to a point where teachers have become relatively expert, will do well not to be too ambitious in the selection of the number and character of the measuring instruments which he will use. In a certain sense he will have to "sell" the idea to his teachers. He cannot do this if he imposes upon them a confusing and difficult task. I t is better for him to select a few tests, each concerned with important activities, than to try to cover a wide range of school subjects. One or two tests carefully administered and competently followed up will satisfy and convince; many tests may do no more than confuse and antagonize. This would seem to be particularly true in the case of rural schools. When, therefore, the Illinois Association of County Superintendents appointed a "Committee on Standard Tests" and when this committee, pursuant to instructions, met with us to plan a rural-school testing program, we were a t once convinced

Assessment Gaze, Refraction, and Blur

“…By spring of 1921, more than 200,000 tests had been sold and widely used, consistent with Taylor’s (1911) scientific principles, to assign students to homogeneous groups by their mental capacity. A related study described by Buckingham (1920), and Buckingham and Monroe (1920), linked achievement tests in mathematics and literacy with a version of an intelligence test to compare schools in various regions and provide guidance in instruction to teachers.…”

Research to Controversy in 10 Decades

“…The 1920 president, B. R. Buckingham, published the substance of his address with a coauthor, W. S. Monroe (who was AERA president in 1917). In their Journal of Educational Research article (Buckingham & Monroe, 1920), they advocated testing as a means to address inequality as it played out in urban and rural schools. Although they spent a good piece justifying their measures for the purpose of literacy assessment, their actual work also embodied elements found later in educational testing.…”

“…The authors’ interest was to determine the degree of literacy differences, and they illustrated the use of tests to understand the literacy problem and lead to its solution. Because teachers in rural settings had less education and frequently taught multiple grades and subjects in one-room schools, Buckingham and Monroe (1920) proposed standardized or common measures, designed to be easily administered, to clarify the extent of achievement differences.…”

“…The intelligence test included subtests in analogies, arithmetical problems, sentence vocabulary, substitution, verbal ingenuity, arithmetical ingenuity, and synonym-antonym. Sections of this test were borrowed from work by Cameron (1921) and Pressey (1920) (Buckingham & Monroe, 1920, p. 524). Achievement tests were divided by grade span, Part 1 for Grades 3 through 5 and Part 2 for Grades 6 through 8.…”

“…Eight subtests on arithmetic for Grades 3 through 5 are summarized as four combinations and four sample examples for each arithmetic operation. In Grades 6 through 8, Monroe revised his Silent Reading Test, and the arithmetic subtests included column addition, long multiplication, long division, subtraction, addition and subtraction of fractions, multiplication and division of fractions, and division of decimals (Buckingham & Monroe, 1920, p. 525). I provide this detail to allow the reader to compare contemporary test content with that used in the Buckingham and Monroe (1920) study.…”