Large-scale assessments and their effects: The case of mid-stakes tests in Ontario

Abstract

This paper analyzes the nature and perceived effects of mid-stakes testing (known as the EQAO) in Ontario, Canada. Ontario's mid-stakes tests were meant to ensure accountability and transparency, and assure system-wide improvement, while avoiding the negative effects and perverse incentives of their high-stakes counterparts. The paper provides new evidence from two projects covering almost a 10-year timespan in 10 of Ontario's 72 school districts. It shows that even though mid-stakes testing is milder in its manifestations and effects than high-stakes testing, concerns remain about the need for and side effects of such testing. The findings concern two periods of Ontario educational reform. In the first period, with a specific focus on improving performance in literacy and mathematics, administrators and special education support staff felt that the assessments raised teachers' expectations and sense of urgency leading to steady improvements in measured achievement, but that there was also evidence of negative effects, especially on paying undue attention to "bubble" students just below the threshold for minimum proficiency. In the second reform period focused on broad excellence, well-being and equity as inclusion, mid-stakes tests were perceived as having more widespread negative effects. These included teaching to the test, cultural bias, avoidance of innovation, dilemmas of whether to include highly vulnerable students in the testing process or not, and emotional ill-being among students and teachers. The paper concludes that Ontario's twentieth century system of large scale, mid-stakes assessment has not kept pace with its twenty first century commitments to deeper learning and stronger well-being.

Leading from the middle: its nature, origins and importance

“…The difficulty for teachers resides in the contradiction between the possibilities of LfM for pursuing a philosophy of getting closer to the student through team-based structures and cultures of collaborative professionalism, on the one hand, and the province’s large-scale testing system on the other (Hargreaves, in press).…”

“…This kind of "bad leadership" from the top that is driven more by agendas to reduce public expenditure than by improving the quality of teaching and learning, could be partially counteracted if districts could, in the spirit of LfM, find new ways to work collaboratively to share their initiatives together within this new policy environmentthrough online platforms, for example. Educators have at times proven to be remarkably resilient in the face of unfavorable policies, as we have documented in relation to change networks in California, Texas, and England that demonstrated measurable gains in student learning against the odds despite discouraging policy environments (Hargreaves andShirley, 2009, 2012;Shirley 1997Shirley , 2002.…”

“…One key characteristic of high-performing educational systems is a strong teaching profession (Hargreaves andShirley, 2009, 2012;OECD, 2011;Tucker, 2019). Ontario, in Canada, has been repeatedly identified as an exemplary high performer, not just because of its overall achievement scores, but also due to its high levels of equity in a context of considerable cultural and linguistic diversity (Campbell et al, 2017;Fullan and Rincón-Gallardo, 2016;Mehta and Schwartz, 2011).…”

“…But, as Bentley (2010) points out, the strategy is weakly suited to complex and uncertain environments where innovation has to be encouraged, and multiple initiatives addressing different constituencies are being pursued simultaneously. Indeed, with Joanne Quinn, Michael Fullan has subsequently recognized the limitations of this model that he previously promoted, and, following Hargreaves andShirley (2009, 2012), and along with Johnson et al (2015), now argues that complex systems need interlocking coherence rather than merely linear alignment of strategies and reform elements (Fullan and Quinn, 2015). More widely, Elmore (2016, p. 531) has similarly revised his own earlier and influential exposition of the linear nature of "getting to scale" (Elmore, 1996).…”

“…Eventually, LfM overlapped with a culture of collaborative professionalism (Hargreaves andO'Connor, 2017, 2018;Campbell, 2016;Fullan and Hargreaves, 2016;Ontario Ministry of Education, 2016) where teachers and other educators work together for all students' success and well-being in ways that are assertive and show initiative. One district, for example, offered modest amounts of funding up to $1,000 for teachers to undertake innovations together.…”