Published in the National Post on May 21, 2015
By David Johnson
David Johnson is professor of economics at Wilfrid Laurier University and C.D. Howe Education Policy Scholar
Many Ontario elementary teachers are working to rule. This means that standard tests in Grade 3 and Grade 6 have been postponed in schools where teachers are part of the Elementary Teacher’s Federation of Ontario (ETFO).
With no new money to offer teachers, could standardized testing in Ontario be a casualty of the current round of negotiations with teachers? Should the province go further, and agree with the ETFO’s claim that provincial testing or all students in elementary schools is unnecessary? Absolutely not.
The ETFO has a long-standing position against the universal assessment of Grade 3 and Grade 6 students. Its website states that the approximately $30 million spent on the Education Quality and Accountability Office (EQAO), which administers province-wide tests, could be better spent reducing class sizes in all grades, and provide more support in the form of special needs and specialist teachers.
There are two parts to the ETFO position. First is the claim that a random sample of students would provide similar information to a universal assessment. Second is that the reduction in costs from a universal assessment to a random sample would be substantial enough to improve other aspects of the education system. Neither claim is true.
A universal assessment of all students is much better than a random sample. There are schools where students have many social and economic disadvantages and get relatively low EQAO results. A superficial analysis says this is a bad school. A more careful comparison of this school to other similar schools reveals it is a good school, that is, if its results are much better than those at a similarly disadvantaged school. Such comparisons across all schools can only be made with a universal assessment.
Further, my research at the C.D. Howe Institute uses universal assessment data to show that students who pass through a middle school do worse on the EQAO assessments in Grade 9 and 10 than students who do not pass through a middle school. The implications are clear: middle schools could be replaced with K-8 schools. This is a convincing argument, and relies on universal student data.
The province also uses the EQAO school-level results to allocate extra funding to where it is most needed. This requires a universal assessment to be a fair mechanism across schools.
The EQAO test gives valuable information for parents too: a teacher different from the students’ classroom teacher grades the EQAO. Two independent opinions on the child’s progress are valuable to the parent, particularly if they do not match. A parent can go to the child’s school and ask which assessment is correct. All parents should have this information.
The school’s principal can use the independent information about a child’s progress as of Grade 3 and Grade 6. If that information did not match the reports from teachers’ progress reports, the principal can act on behalf of the student. All principals should have this information.
It cost $33 million in 2014 to operate the entire EQAO. Only a part of this cost is the universal elementary level assessment. Suppose we accept the ETFO’s suggestion that we could save $30 million and expand other services instead. The saving is $22 per student or, at the average elementary school, $7,538 per school. If an Ontario teacher costs about $75,000 per year, each school might gain one-tenth of a teacher. This is not a meaningful addition to the funds at a school, certainly not enough to meaningfully reduce class size or provide significant additional resources for special needs students or other resource teachers.
I believe the ETFO’s opposition to a universal assessment is wrongheaded. The universal assessment empowers both parents and principals in conversations with teachers. There is no good argument for decreasing the quality of data that allows us to better understand the progress of students through the school system.
While many parents are relieved that daily services to their children will not be interrupted, during tense negotiations between teachers and the province, there are still major costs to not administering the universal assessment exams. And with little budgetary room for the province to manoeuvre, the province, and the parents it serves, should ensure that the universal assessment for elementary students remain a priority.
With minimal costs and clear benefits, universal EQAO elementary assessments should not be on the table in negotiations.
