MINIMUM COMPETENCIES EDUCATIONAL REFORM DURING THE 1980S Are

MINIMUM COMPETENCIES: EDUCATIONAL REFORM DURING THE 1980’S Are you a 80's kid? - You. Tube

HISTORY AND POLICY CONTEXT OF MINIMUM COMPETENCY TESTING The post-Sputnik education reform movement in the United States initially targeted the areas of science and mathematics, thus sparking the popularity of minimum competency programs. Between 1975 and 1978 more than 30 states enacted Minimum Competency mandates The release of A Nation At Risk, report on education in 1983, compounded the pressure from political and business leaders throughout the country to raise our academic standards across the board for all students.

PROBLEMS WITH EARLY MINIMUM COMPETENCY PROGRAMS Since there was not an agreed upon definition of Minimum Competencies, policy makers defined these as requisite skills within each jurisdiction (Winfield, 1990).

ORIGINAL INTENT OF MINIMUM COMPETENCY TESTING: *Add meaning to a high school diploma; where as the students had to demonstrate at least minimum levels of knowledge to graduate or to move on to the next grade level. *For graduation, it was assumed that these minimum levels would mean successful job performance.

THEORETICAL ASSUMPTIONS OF MINIMUM COMPETENCY PROGRAMS There were 3 main categories of assumption: *preparedness for the workplace *school reform *learning theory

WORKPLACE COMPETENCIES: EFFECTIVE WORKERS CAN USE: *Resources-knowing how to allocate time, money, materials and space *Interpersonal Skills-work as a team *Information-ability to acquire, evaluate, organize, communicate and process information *Systems-understanding both social and organizational *Technology-select and use appropriate equipment and tools

FOUNDATIONAL SKILLS: WORKERS IN THE HIGH- COMPETENT PERFORMANCE WORKPLACE NEED: *Basic Skills-reading, writing, mathematics, speaking and listening *Thinking Skills-ability to learn, to reason, to think creatively, to make decisions and solve problems *Personal Qualities-individual responsibility, self –esteem and self-management, social ability and integrity (From SCANS, 1992 p. 6)

BELIEFS ABOUT MINIMUM COMPETENCY SCHOOL REFORM Supporters of competency testing programs believed that the use of such testing would create incentives for lowperforming schools and students to improve their performance. *A rise in test scores supported these beliefs *The Resnicks (1992) argued against this belief by stating “whether we like it or not, you get what you assess and you do not get what you don’t assess”

THE LAKE WOBEGON EFFECT By the end of the 1980’s, evidence began to accrue, showing that impressive score gains on these tests, might not be a sign of real learning gains. For example, John Cannell’s 1987 study, given the name “Lake Wobegon Report, ” showed that all fifty states claimed their test scores were above the national average. The Lake Wobegon Effect-the human tendency to overestimate one’s achievements and capabilities in relation to others.

BELIEFS ABOUT LEARNING This approach to testing is closely linked to behaviorist learning theory. Behaviorism expects learning in a given domain to be the sequential accumulation of requisite skills, therefore, testing should occur at each specific learning step. While this sounds logical, it is not always true. The adequacy of the “one size fits all” theory has been challenged by new developments in the human learning theory. Current information from cognitive psychology indicates that students do not need to possess all essential basic skills before they are capable of moving on to more complex skills.

We start out with the goal of making the important measurable, and end up making only the measureable important.

INTENDED EFFECTS *Improvement in basic mathematic skills *Increase in basic reading achievement *Increase in test scores

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES *Increasing dropout rate for more successful students (Griffin & Heirdorn, 1996, Reardon, 1996) *Narrowing curriculum (Lomax, West, Harmon, Viator & Madaus, 1995; Shepard & Dougherty, 1991) *Lack of transfer to higher-order skills (Frederikson, 1994)

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES Minimum competency testing has also been characterized by it’s opponents as a racist means of denying educational credentials, such as high school diplomas, to minority students, African –American students in particular. This argument is based on the failure rate of African-American students, which historically has been greater than that of Caucasian students on these and other academic achievement test.

PHILOSOPHICAL AND PRACTICAL ARGUMENTS: Minimum Competencies establishes a de facto, two- track educational system. This allows for the gap between the higher and lower achievers to continue to widen. Competency testing essentially contradicts current mandates for having students learn more rigorous content standards. There has been no evidence demonstrating the use of minimum competency testing positively influences the skills and knowledge needed for the 21 st century workplace

LESSONS LEARNED: 1) It is easier to mandate a high-stakes assessment program than to generate and implement one. 2) Sometimes, the unintended consequences of a state policy action are more far-reaching than the intended consequences. 3) Establishing cut-off scores became the “boomerang” of the MCT movement. 4) MCT did not have an equal impact on students. 5) Once MCT programs were started, they were difficult to contain. 6) New data, better data or just more data can sometimes put the public spotlight on an ignored issue. 7) The distance between the test taker and the consequence of highstakes testing had a direct relationship to how students perceive a test’s usefulness and seriously they take it.

MINIMUM COMPETENCY TALKING POINTS: 1) Should the passing of a standardized test allow for a student to receive a diploma and graduate early? (Early exit programs) 2) Should a minimum competency test score be reason to deny a diploma? 3) Should schools offer more than one diploma option? (Academic and regular versions) 4) If a student fails the test in 9 th grade, would it be the student’s or the school’s responsibility to fix the problem? Should remediation be considered? 5) Who should set the standards for the content of the test? Policy makers? Commercial testing companies? Committees of educators? 6) Who should be in charge of administrating and paying for the testing program? The Feds? Individual states? Local school boards?