Kindergartner Issues in the Spotlight

Ethics in Early Childhood Development What is your stance on testing and social promotion? I am in the group that is vigorously opposed to the overuse of and reliance on standardized testing in schools. The No Child Left Behind guidelines, for example, that forced teachers to "teach to the test" (or perhaps lose their jobs or have their schools punished) have been proven to be unfair and unproductive.

Moreover teachers that rely on standardized tests are not challenging their students to learn how to solve problems and to think critically; rather, they are just asking students to memorize material so the scores on the tests will make the teachers and schools look good. However, relying on standardized testing is fool's gold rather than real learning.

In this case (Maria's children were not passed into 1st grade because they failed a standardized test) it is outrageous for a school to hold kindergarten children back because they didn't score high enough on a standardized test. In the letter by Jonathan Kozol, he points out that, shamefully, "Thousands of inner-city elementary schools, for instance, have dramatically cut back" teaching science, social studies, the arts and literature; and this has been done so children "…can be drilled on strategies to boost their scores" (112).

This strategy is robbing young students of the chance to explore subjects that are vital in terms of a child's perception of the world and how he or she fits in. An even more outrageous notion is what they do in some Atlanta schools: taking away playground activities in order to drill students so they pass standardized tests (113).

In the NAEYC Code of Ethical Conduct and Statement of Commitment (2011) Ideal I-1.6 points out that "assessment information" should be used that is "appropriate for the children to be assessed…and that have the potential to benefit children" (page 2).

How does it benefit Maria's children to hold them back in Kindergarten instead of letting them move ahead with their peers to 1st grade? Is there a possibility in this case that the children are not fully bilingual and maybe struggled with the language on the tests? As far back as 1994 scholars were questioning the wisdom of standardized testing. An article in the peer-reviewed journal Applied Measurement in Education references a survey of teachers (in 17 Midwestern elementary schools) who responded to court-ordered "achievement testing" (Moore, 1994).

Teachers "…reported finding minimum value in the purpose or results from the tests"; teachers reported that they "…experienced pressure from others, inside and outside their school, to improve student scores" (Moore, 343). Moreover, studies show that "…ethnic minority populations…score significantly lower on traditional standardized tests than do white Americans" (Altshuler, et al., 2006). Assuming that Maria's children are Latino, this fact applies to Maria's situation.

The authors assert that teachers that are culturally sensitive to diversity report "…frustration with the outcomes of standardized exams" because often they "contradict the teachers' personal classroom observations and assessments" (Altshuler, 7). What should the school policy be? The district is wrong to insist that kindergarten students should pass a standardized test before moving along to 1st grade. There is no harm in assessing kindergarteners but it is overkill to insist these tiny children pass a standardized test (that may be biased against minority children).

On page 12 of the Developmentally Appropriate Practice publication the authors explain that a child's social experiences with "…other children in the pre-school years may help him develop social skills and confidence" that help the child make friends later in life (2009). When young children do not develop "minimal social skills" and thus are experience "rejection from their peers," they are at risk to be a school dropout or suffer "mental health problems." Keeping Maria's children back rather than allowing them to continue to 1st grade.