Standardized Testing - and the pioneers that went before us

The announcement that soon after the holidays our students will do their annual standardized test made me again ponder the purpose of it in the context of Montessori.  Standardized tests measure a child’s knowledge and progress against a curriculum that is designed by the government, like the new Common Core standards. They outline what every child is expected to learn. Although only public and charter Montessori schools are mandated to administer standardized tests, Montessorians generally have tried to “fit in” by not only participating in the testing, but also by demonstrating that Montessori learning outcomes are compatible with state learning standards.  For example, a few years ago, Australia aligned every single Montessori lesson and activity with the country’s traditional content standards. Both curricula are now government approved and are implemented in parallel. Similarly, the American Montessori Society (AMS) and the Association Montessori International (AMI) have mapped all lessons in language and math – those mostly tested in the U.S. – to the Common Core. They show that Montessori learning - while not offered in lock-step fashion, but presented over a one to three year period - frequently exceeds traditional expectations.

There are quite a number of educational pioneers who have re-articulated what Maria Montessori advocated more than hundred years ago. John Taylor Gatto emphasizes individuality, family, and community as the core of a person’s education and warns that in a rapidly changing society a set body of information to be imparted to students is not sufficient to prepare them for their adult life. Howard Gardner’s theory of Multiple Intelligences opened our eyes that we all take in information in different ways, be it visually, auditory, linguistically, mathematically, musically etc. Therefore, learning material needs to be presented in a variety of ways, so no child is left behind in the process. In England, Sir Kenneth Robinson’s humorous talks make us realize the stark difference between the conformity, standardization, and compliance of the traditional school system and the innovative output of creative and individualized learning environments. Already in the 1930’s, the Russian educator Lev Vygotsky practiced and wrote extensively about his holistic and integrated approach to learning and defended the child’s intrinsic ability to “construct” himself. More recently, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi’s best seller Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience relates directly to what Maria Montessori refers to as “deep concentration” of the child and the resulting inner motivation, engagement, and satisfaction. If all this sounds familiar to what we encounter in a Montessori classroom, we can see that our century has finally caught up with Dr. Montessori’s discovery.

In all these non-traditional learning approaches assessment does not rely on a once-a-year testing event on paper; it is an integrated part of educational development. The child’s understanding is continuously visible in concrete output and demonstration, and testing is therefore a tool for learning rather than a measurement of yearly progress. In the Montessori classroom, this testing occurs in three ways: the child’s self-assessment, the teacher’s evaluation, and the joint review by teacher and student.

The child’s self-assessment is facilitated through the self-correcting Montessori materials. They allow the child to realize her mistake and correct it without adult intervention. From a cylinder piece that is left over because other cylinders were not placed correctly in the block, to a forlorn number label in skip-counting the thousand-chain, to a missing verb symbol in the materialized sentence analysis, the child needs to use her advanced thinking skills to analyze the mistake, repeat the exercise, and correct the procedure. There are control booklets and charts to check one’s work from the primary through elementary years. Students also reinforce their knowledge by giving lessons to their friends or engage in peer review for their written work.

The foundation for teacher evaluation is the practice of observation. Throughout the day, the teacher will take out time to observe how children are going about their work. She makes notes for needed re-presentation, follow-up explanations of concepts, or scheduling of a new lesson. The Montessori three-period lesson is another tool for teaching and assessment all the way up to the higher levels.  In the primary it may begin with, “This is blue…red….yellow (1^st period); “Show me red…hand me the yellow tablet….” (2^nd period, the teacher still names the new concept, i.e. three primary colors); “What is this… that… (3^rd period, the child now names the new concept). If the child cannot manage the concept in the 3^rd period, the teacher will simply go back to the 2^nd or 1^st period, without having to tell the child that she was “wrong”. Since only one isolated concept is presented in every new lesson, there is continuous opportunity for the teachers to review understanding of previous concepts on which to build the next lesson. The teacher also deepens and assesses the student’s understanding by helping him to verbalize processes, especially in the elementary years.

The joint review by teacher and students occurs in the elementary during regular one-on-one conferences. These are conversations to review the child’s work journal and completed work in his portfolio. They help him make choices for activities and decisions about needed work. The child has the opportunity to ask for specific lessons or share concerns about difficulties.  This process conveys to the child his ownership of and accountability for learning. Joint assessment also occurs when students present completed projects to their class and are scrutinized by their peers with probing questions, while the teacher silently takes note of the presenter’s clarifying explanations.

If all these assessment mechanisms provide such in-depth familiarity with children’s progress, which is shared with their parents in bi-annual reports and conferences, why do we still offer standardized testing in our private school?  We do so in alignment with Maria Montessori’s view of education as an “aid to life” and the child’s “acquisition of culture” - of which academic achievement is not the whole, but a necessary part. As long as standardized testing is part of our culture, students will practice the necessary skills. They approach the tests as any other practical life activity that, in this case, includes sitting alone and silently at a desk, listening to adult instructions without questioning, filling in the bubbles of multiple choice questions, and practicing compliance as opposed to free choice. Like learning the multiplication table or accepting various spelling rules that are not open to their customary reasoning mind or up for discussion, testing for them is just one of those things “that people do.” I can hardly wait to observe how they breeze through the process with admirable composure, and I am not concerned that his once-a-year standardized testing will turn their wonderful inquisitiveness into “standardized minds.”

Inga Sieminski