Does Using Understanding by Design Mean You're "Teaching to the Test?"

by Kate Wolfe Maxlow

One of the questions I'm frequently asked in professional development sessions is: Does using Understanding by Design to plan for learning, with its emphasis on first looking at standards, then determining how you will assess whether students have "got it," and THEN planning the learning experiences to help them be successful--doesn't all that just mean that you're "teaching to the test?"

In short, yes. It does.

But wait! Don't march away in disgust yet!

The problem here is not actually the idea that your instruction should align with the way that you're going to assess learning; the problem is that too often, we don't approach assessment with a balanced framework. When we only think of assessments as multiple choice tests, or even multiple choice with an occasional Technology Enhanced Item (TEI) or essay thrown in for good measure, we're doing our students a disservice.

The majority of states use multiple choice and TEI items (with a smattering of essays here and there) because, quite simply, those are the easiest and cheapest to grade (essays, grated, take longer, and that's why they're not used nearly as often). And, when written well, multiple choice and TEI can get you pretty far up the Bloom's ladder--all the way to the Analyze level.

But what about the Evaluate and Create levels? We can't leave them out. Those are incredibly important skills not just for young people, but for everyone. And you can't get at those levels through traditional assessments.

That's one reason why Understanding by Design strongly emphasizes the use of performance assessments--of actually having students USE their learning in higher-level, authentic ways. And while several states are experimenting with performance assessments as an addition to or replacement for traditional standardized assessments, no one has quite yet figured out how to do performance assessments yet at a state level with the same cost and efficiency as the current multiple choice/TEI/occasional essay tests.

Where does that leave our schools? Well, certainly schools need to meet state and federal accreditation benchmarks. There's no doubt about that. But what we often see is that, believe it or not, focusing on test preparation doesn't provide quite the bang-for-your-buck that it used to. These days, as the rigor of the tests moves up, students need to have more hands-on experiences to think critically and creatively--both for their own good AND in order to score well on their assessments.

So what about those dirty words--"teaching to the test?" Well, if your test isn't simply lower-level multiple choice, but is instead a variety of some multiple choice, short answer, essay, and performance assessment, your learning experiences will look less like drill-and-kill flashcards and worksheets, and more like lessons in which students practice thinking critically and creatively. Yes, there still might be some use of flashcards (especially when there's particular knowledge that students need to be able to use fluently to be successful), and probably some lessons on testing strategies, but the key is that shouldn't be all there is.

And really, if you're not teaching so that your instruction is aligned with your assessments...either you're assessing something that you haven't taught (which isn't fair), or you're teaching without assessing...in which case, how will you know that the students "got it?"

The key there isn't to not "teach to the test." The key is to redefine what we mean by "test."

Kate Maxlow is the Professional Learning Coordinator at Hampton City Schools in Hampton, Virginia. She can be reached at kmaxlow@hampton.k12.va.us