Mrs. Leskiw: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Last spring I brought forth private member's Motion 503, which urged the government to "eliminate provincial achievement tests for grade 3 students and consider alternative assessments for learning." On March 16, 2009, Motion 503 was carried. Teachers and parents across Alberta are wondering what action the government has taken pertaining to the elimination of grade 3 PATs. Mr. Speaker, my question is the to Minister of Education. What has this government done in reevaluating the grade 3 PATs since Motion 503 was passed?
The Speaker: The hon. minister.
Mr. Hancock: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again an important question. We do have concerns from across the province, particularly at the grade 3 level, with parents and teachers saying that there's a high degree of stress placed on students. Firstly, I would say that there's absolutely no need for that stress. The assessment that we're doing in grade 3 is about reporting the results of the system. It has no effect on the students' ability to pass or fail, and it plays no part in the assessment of the teacher. It's a valuable tool. The question, then, is: if you're going to give up that valuable tool, what are you replacing it with? What are you going to use to get the type of information you need to assess the system and to help in the assessment of the students?
The Speaker: The hon. member.
Mrs. Leskiw: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My first supplementary question is to the same minister. The grade 3 PATs cost the government approximately $5 million each year. With the recent cutbacks in education could this not be a way to save money without affecting the learning of grade 3 students in this province?
Mr. Hancock: Well, Mr. Speaker, the entire program of provincial achievement tests for grades 3, 6, and 9 actually costs us approximately $4 million. The grade 3 achievement tests account for approximately $600,000 per year of that. Now, if you moved to diagnostic assessment as a tool or to some other tool for formative and summative assessment, one of the things that you'd know is that that will actually cost more money, not less. So while we are interested in designing better tools to do formative and summative assessment, we also have to be cognizant of the fact that doing it that way will actually cost more, not less.
The Speaker: The hon. member.
Mrs. Leskiw: Thank you. My final supplemental is to the same minister. Mr. Speaker, when can Albertans expect a definite answer regarding the status of grade 3 PATs? Will the grade 3s this year be expected to write them in June?
The Speaker: The hon. minister.
Mr. Hancock: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. We have had discussions with the ATA and with other stakeholders about the role of PATs at the grade 3 level and moving to a better tool for formative and summative assessment. That discussion is ongoing. We're looking at the various tools that could be used for that. It's important not to move, I believe, to cancel the existing tests, which do have value for the system, until we know that we've got something to move to. The question really can only be answered by saying that if and when we have the new tool in place and are ready to engage in it, then we'll be in a position to cancel the old tests, or if we're certain that we're going to be able to move there, we can cancel the old tests. Will that happen by June? I don't know.
My question is, what is supposed to be achieved by evaluating students at that young age? What are you really evaluating? If you are evaluating the system, isn't it going to come out with the Grade six results? If you don't think teachers and schools are assessed by administrators and parents when the marks are being recorded in newspapers, you are being very naive and obtuse.
We are dedicating a whole PD day, at the insistence of our superintendent, to studying the PAT results, and finding ways to raise those results. We are not allowed ANY other PD activity, since NOTHING appears to be more important to our superintendent then raising our results. He feels that our students are not receiving a fair education if our results are lower than others in the province, and by raising the PAT results we are raising the level of learning. Now, you were saying they are not used in the assessment of the teacher, or the student? Please, be realistic here. That is exactly how they are being used, and while we need evaluative assessments, we should at least recognize the true impact of those tests. They determine how whole school divisions, individual schools, and teachers provide education. You bet they are used to assess students. You bet they are used to assess teachers. They are used and overused. Keep them or drop them, at least be honest about the affect they have on the education system.
Carol – the fact that the Fraser Institute obtains results under Freedom of Information laws (we do not publish them)and creates inappropriate rankings which the newspapers are only too happy to publish does not mean we should stop doing something which has value.
The question to be answered "what is the real value?" The media and the self proclaimed experts cannot be allowed to drive policy. Parents wil always look for information to help them with educational choices for their children – and we want them to do so. We must have parents engaged just as we must have the broader community engaged. So — what do we need to do, as a system, as individual boards, as schools and as teachers to provide the kind of information and opportunity which will allow parents to make informed choices and be involved meaningfully in their child's education? I would dearly love to ban the publication of the PAT results to keep the focus where it should be, but I fail to see that eliminating the PAT tests just so that the results cannot be inappropriately used is the answer.
Leon – of course one would expect the PAT results to be taken seriously by a school board and a school. If the information is not used to inform practice what value is it. The point is that it should not be used raw to assess a teacher, as each class is made up of individual students and the test uses standards of performance. Teachers succeed in moving students from where they are to where they can be — achieving potential. However that does not mean that the results cannot be used by a school to discern where things may be done better or areas which need concerted effort. A teacher does not pass or fail in Alberta based on PAT results, but can a teacher look at results from individual classes and trendlines over years and look to improve or change professional practice? Of course they can. Can a school look at trendlines of results, knowing the demographic makeup of the community and the school, discern areas that are weak and develop strategies to improve? Without a doubt.
So good on your board for taking the time to analyze the results — not to measure teacher or student performance for promotion or merit — but to learn from those results the better to understand the challenges and improve or change practice to meet those challenges. It is not a mattter of "keeping or dropping," but of continuously improving. When we can move to a process that has more value to individual student learning, improved professional practice and system improvement we should move to it. If something we do has no value we should drop it. But we should not make change based on a shallow interpretation by the Fraser Institute, nor should we be afraid of using the results validly just because an individual teacher may not like what the results portray in a particular instance. Have the courage to embrace what the results can tell about how we can do better.
LOL... You have, of course, brought up points that I as a professional cannot address, in regards to how an fellow professional may view the results.
It is important to look at the results in order to determine areas we can focus greater attention onto. It is equally important to compare our students' progress from September to June, which unfortunately the PAT results cannot show us, simply the improvement of one class over another. Thus, we can determine if we are improving in our provision, if we presume that statistically one class is identical to the previous class, but we cannot necessarily determine if the individual student is improving based on PAT results..
We know that the PAT results show us a snapshot picture, and we can use that to determine general areas of weakness and strength in the provision of education. We also know that the PAT result are just an indicator, not the only pillar to judge our students' learning. But we do know that the PAT results are used as the main indicator of success, when these results need to be kept in context.
Our division is approaching the PAT results conscientiously, bringing in experts from Alberta Education to help us understand what we are reading and explain how best to incorporate this learning into our teaching.
Just as long as the focus is on the student, not on achieving a higher ranking. Improving education is crucial. Improving Fraser Institute standings should not be. Thanks for your insights, Dave.