Improper help invalidates students' WKCE results
JANESVILLE — Eight Janesville elementary students got help they shouldn't have gotten while taking the state's standardized math test this fall.
The scores were invalidated, and the proctor who gave the help faced "consequences," Superintendent Karen Schulte said.
The proctor was supervising 11 students who were taking the Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts math test. Eight of the scores were invalidated.
The proctor read some words in the test questions for the students, gave clues when students asked for help and "walked around the classroom and indicated" to students that they should redo some of their answers, according to a DPI incident report form.
The proctor also allowed some of the third-graders to use a number grid and multiplication tables.
Schulte said she believes the proctor made a mistake.
"I don't believe there was any malicious intent," and there was no intent to inflate the test results, Schulte said.
Schulte would not say whether the proctor was a teacher, an aide or an administrator. She said she feels obliged to protect his identity because of the personnel aspects of the incident.
Schulte would not say what consequences were imposed on the proctor, who still works for the district.
Schulte said she is not aware of any previous such violation ever occurring here.
Local officials did the right thing by notifying the state, said Jennifer Thayer, assistant superintendent for reading and student achievement at the Department of Public Instruction.
The state receives 15 to 25 such notifications each year.
Unless the security of the test is involved, the state doesn't do much more than tell the district to invalidate the scores.
Thayer said the state investigated but does not look into why a testing irregularity occurred.
"It's a matter of did it or didn't it. Beyond that, it's a district decision if they want to take preventive measures to make sure it doesn't happen again," Thayer said.
Each school is rated on how many students performed at the levels of "minimum," "basic," "proficient" or "advanced." Schools must make "adequate yearly progress" each year, based on students' performance, under rules that originated with the No Child Left Behind law.
Removing the eight scores probably will not make a big difference in Wilson's overall performance, Thayer said.
The proctor's actions might have been the right thing to do if the students were identified as having certain disabilities or were not native English speakers, but that was not the case, officials said.
Schulte said proctors are trained in test procedures.
"We do everything possible to make sure that people are right up to date with what they can and can't do," Schulte said.
Nevertheless, the incident has prompted the district to take a look at how it trains proctors and how soon that training occurs before the test.
The district also administers a test called Measures of Academic Progress, and the rules for that test differ, so that could be the source of the mistake, Schulte said.
The MAP test measures student progress better than the state test, local officials believe, so teachers will still have a good idea of where these students might need help, Schulte said.
Thayer said the state relies on local officials to let them know when questions arise about testing procedures, but it also does statistical analyses that would flag questionable results, such as everyone in a school answering all the questions the same way.
"Obviously, the state takes this very seriously, and the district takes it very seriously, so it is important that all the rules and regulations that are given to us, and there are many, that they're all followed," Schulte said.
Jul 24, 2011 at 4:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
Once again our superintendent falls down on the job. Karen, I realize you cannot please everyone all of the time but you really have disserviced the district, yet again. I do not advocate standards based "education" nor standardized teacher evaluations but really some level of accountablility must exist and it should start at the top.
Parents, IEP or not, there will come a time when someone is not looking over these young persons' shoulders...
Better that they become "frustrated" and learn to overcome obstacles now. Having worked with, taught, and mentored undergraduates with various learning disabilities, I do not state that glibly.
What is the absolute worst that happens? Repeating the third grade?
It's appalling that the best and brightest in our schools are not also afforded individualized instruction and "resource rooms".
Dec 27, 2009 at 12:23 a.m.
Suggest removal
whythink , i agree an iep could mean different rules. but they also send home a paper asking you if you want your child to receive help or to be tested independently . i have always checked the box to let them test independently assuming i was getting a true picture of where they were at that point and time. and it also doesnt stop at the grade school levels we had this problem every time any general testing of a whole grade level happened.
Dec 26, 2009 at 2:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
at WILSON, which narrows it down further...("Removing the eight scores probably will not make a big difference in Wilson's overall performance, Thayer said.")
Dec 26, 2009 at 1:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
"She said she feels obliged to protect HIS identity because of the personnel aspects of the incident."
Well that narrows it down!
Dec 26, 2009 at 9:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
Teachers as well need to be graded, as well as the students. No cheating allowed.
Dec 26, 2009 at 8:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
It is only natural for a teacher, teacher's aide or administrator to want to help 3rd grade students.
.
Like the article stated, the MAP Tests used by the district have different rules. An IEP could also mean different rules.
.
I would guess, as some of you have stated, that this wasn't an accident BUT the reason wasn't to cheat...most likely the proctor was just trying to help a frustrated kid.
.
Lastly, let's remember, this test is a joke. Most professional educators believe it is a waste of time and money. These proctors, know their students and if a student has a quick fuse when frustrated what should they do. Watch a student get frustrated, ruin his/her day over a bogus test required by some idiot in Madison/D.C. or help the student out?
.
Obviously, following the rules should be #1 but when dealing with young children...I want someone with a heart near my kids.
Dec 25, 2009 at 11:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
monof5 , i had a child in high school that had an iep , and according to the testing this child was a genius. when i asked how they did so well on this test , they simply said the teacher made a funny noise if i had the answer wrong. when i approached the school about it , they just swept it under the rug. it benefits the school to have as many children as possible do good on these tests. who wants their name in the paper for the lowest test scores , how will that attract families to their town and school system
Dec 25, 2009 at 7:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
These kids may have needed this help and normally would have received it during a "normal" test. However, if they are not under an IEP, then the district is under no obligation (implied or otherwise) to accomodate a student during testing. My son has an IEP. As painful as it was to see him struggle and get discouraged during testing, it was necessary. Sometimes the means do justify the end! I applaud this teacher for doing what teacher's are suppose to do but my masking these children's test scores by aiding them in any fashion, he did them a severe disservice!
Dec 25, 2009 at 10:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
The only mistake made was getting caught cheating.
Dec 25, 2009 at 9:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
Student tests to determine teacher pay need to be given by a totally independent person where the teacher(s) have no access to the students on that day.
Dec 25, 2009 at 9:03 a.m.
Suggest removal
Wait and see how many cases like this occur when the teachers' pay/raises, or compensation are determined by these test scores!
Dec 25, 2009 at 6:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
"She believes the proctor made a mistake." How incompetent do you have to be as a test proctor on a state-wide standardized test to know that this behavior is completely unacceptable? Doesn't the test come with specific instructions for the proctor and the students? If this person can't follow basic instructions on a test for 3rd graders, what could he or she be relied upon to do in a school setting?
"The proctor was supervising 11 students who were taking the Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts math test." Isn't 11 students a rather small test group? What might this group have consisted of and was there an interest in upping their scores? "'The proctor who gave the help faced 'consequences.' Superintendent Karen Schulte said." What are the "consequences" of a mistake, versus an intentional act (which I have a hard time believing this is not by the limited facts presented).
How much wasted time, effort and money did this incompetence cause? Why can't the school district share the full truth on this incident, instead of just giving us the spin? Perhaps an open records request will be necessary to get the full story (unless the school district is like Rock County, in which case that request is likely to only result in lies, denial and subterfuge!).
Dec 25, 2009 at 1:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
Good grief!
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.