Professors in the University Senate blasted a plan to bring national standardized tests to campus, saying yesterday that the proposal would undermine their lesson plans and restrict students’ creativity.
Last week, an association representing 430 public colleges and universities, including those in Maryland, voted to implement a standardized test that would make universities easier to compare. But professors in the senate, the university’s most powerful policy making body, said they feared the test – at this point, only a pilot program – would steer the university’s curriculum rather than faculty.
“Instead of teaching what we think are important things to study, we’ll be working to show how well students perform on these tests,” said Elise Miller-Hooks, an associate engineering professor and a member of the Senate Executive Committee, which discussed the plan at a meeting yesterday.
The test would be given to randomly selected groups of freshmen and seniors and measure students’ writing, math skills and critical thinking. While the pilot has the support of of University System of Maryland Chancellor Brit Kirwan, making it permanent would need approval from university President Dan Mote, who rarely contradicts the senate’s recommendations.
As the Bush administration considers creating its own criteria for comparing higher education institutions similar to the No Child Left Behind Act, Kirwan said the tests he supports – developed by the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges – would keep educational standards in the hands of educators.
“Anything that the government imposes on higher education would be a bad thing,” he said.
Still, several members on the committee called for the senate’s full body to take an official position against the proposal.
Researchers from across the country will assess the standardized tests and provide a recommendation after a four-year trial run. But the university would be able to opt out of the trial at any point.
Mote’s Chief of Staff Ann Wylie expressed concern that the proposed test wouldn’t measure a diverse enough set of skills.
“Is that the point of higher education?” Wylie asked rhetorically. “We try to teach a lot of things. Is that OK for other people to say. This is what you’re going to be evaluated for?”
If the rumblings for standardization from the White House continue to mount, Wylie suggested the university could also mandate its own test.
Many professors hadn’t started research on the issue, but at the meeting yesterday, that didn’t tide their initial skepticism, which, many times, came through as rage.
“I just think it’s wrong for so many reasons; I just can’t articulate them. I hope that we will have a chance to make a statement on this,” Miller-Hooks said after the meeting.
Senate Director Mary Giles said the ball could start rolling on recommendation on the measure in early December, when chairs of various senate committees will meet with Provost Nariman Farvardin.
Kirwan urged faculty not to get hung up on the tests, which are only one part of the three-part proposal NASULGC approved last week. He said its other components would help gather information on graduation rates and financial aid availability. It would also question students on their thoughts about their university experience .
cohendbk@gmail.com
