Last Friday,
I took a three-hour plus, computer based standardized test – the GRE. Heading into it, I was focused solely on
myself. Once I was done, with the help
of some colleagues, I began to think about my experience as paralleling that of students today.
In Michigan,
we know that state computer-based testing is just on the horizon. In our district, students are already taking
formative and summative computer assessments for certain classes or district
purposes, and some students have participated in S-BAC pilot testing. I wonder how my experience compares to
theirs.
First, a
caveat. I was not nervous about the
test. This completely distinguishes me
from most of our kids today, even on a formative assessment. Why?
Maybe because I chose to take this test?
Or maybe because of my age and life experience? In any event, I am well aware of the huge
role that anxiety plays in test-taking for our kids. Does computer-based testing add to this
anxiety?
The last
time I took a “mandated” test was 2002, when I had to pass my teaching certification
tests in Political Science and History.
I took both on the same day, and both were multiple-choice,
paper-and-pencil tests with a bubble answer sheet. I sat in a classroom at Calvin College, in a
regular college-style desk, with about 20-30 other testees all around me. The proctor was in the front of the room. I definitely had anxiety that day. I had heard how many teachers do not pass the
History certification test on the first go-around, and I was taking it AND
another one on the same day. Lucky for
me, I did pass both (happily, on the first try).
This time, I
went to a Prometric Testing Center. The other
people who were showing up to test at my appointed time were there for a whole variety
of tests. We waited out in a small
lobby, and were admitted to a processing area one at a time. I had to put
everything except my ID into a locker – even my watch. I had to turn my pockets inside out, and be
wanded for any electronics I might be trying to sneak in. It reminded me of going through airport
security, except that I got to keep my shoes on. My picture was taken and inserted into the
electronic answer form I would be using.
I truly felt like a “number.” I didn’t
feel like anyone but myself was invested in my performance. I would hope that as teachers proctor
assessments, even those that are computer-based, that we would try to connect
with our kids so that they are reminded we care.
As I entered
the testing room, I was directed to a carrel that was set up for me. It had a desk top computer, a pair of
noise-deafening headphones, two pencils, and a booklet of scratch paper. I couldn’t see any other testee, but I could
hear them. The “proctor” was in the processing
area; she could see all of us through windows, but if we needed her, we had to
raise our hand. There was no clock in
the room that I could see, but each section of the test had a countdown
function so I knew how much time I had left on any specific part.
Once my
picture and form came up on the screen, I could begin. The first task I had was a 30 minute writing
activity. I quickly donned the
headphones, as the clicking noises from the other computers was distracting.
The headphones were not comfortable, especially with my glasses on. I knew ahead of time that I had the option of
bringing my own ear buds or ear plugs; I wish I would have done so.
At first, I
didn’t like planning on the paper and then typing on the screen. However, well into the writing, I was happy I
could cut and paste, as opposed to drawing arrows on a written essay to change
the order in which I wanted the argument to flow. Also, I know that the typed version was much
neater than any handwritten piece I could have produced. By the time I got to the second writing task,
I felt a lot more comfortable with the format.
Our students today are so used to writing in this way, I’m not sure they
would have the same feelings I did.
My third and
fifth sections were “Quantitative Reasoning,” otherwise known as math. It was a mix of algebra, geometry, and basic
math skills. My next tool to learn and
tackle was the on-screen calculator. It
was fairly easy to use, but I didn’t like where it showed up. I had to move it each time I opened it. I also used the scratch paper a lot for the
math, because I was more comfortable doing some of the computations by hand –
that shows my age. While kids today have
access to calculators at a very early age, I don’t remember getting one until 11th grade when I took calculus. I
suspect our students will have no problems navigating the on-line calculator.
The other
two sections of the test were “Verbal Reasoning.” These sections were mostly reading comprehension
and vocabulary use. There were on-line
highlighting tools available, but I didn’t use them. I didn’t want to waste time trying to figure
them out. Had I been taking a paper test, I definitely would have used my
pencil to circle or underline parts of the reading passages. In the end, because I am a strong reader, I
don’t think it impacted my score, but it did frustrate me a bit.
There were
breaks available during the test, but I didn’t take them. Not because I had a point to prove, but
because I had a meeting in the afternoon I was trying to make. By the time I was done, three hours and
fifteen minutes had passed. I was flabbergasted. I had no real sense of the passage of
time. I was also mentally
exhausted. Utterly and thoroughly
exhausted – any thinking I tried later in the day was labored and ineffective. Even if I had taken the short breaks, it
would not have lessened the intellectual weariness I felt. I think we need to be mindful of the energy
toll tests take on our kids.
The
experience has given me some insight into what we are asking our students to
do. What do you think?
