“Teaching to the test” is a common pejorative term that touches on a number of hot-button education policy issues—top-down mandates to schools, shrinking curriculum, hamstringing teacher autonomy and creativity, and dampening student interest in learning to name just a few. A new report from Austria puts those negative implications under the microscope and, despite limitations of the methodology, finds some valuable insights from the field.
The context is a change in the structure of school-leaving exams in mathematics, which are required of all Austrian students prior to high school graduation. Traditionally, the tests were designed by the teacher of the final class in each school. Although there were minimal design strictures, each exam was required to consist of four to six tasks to be solved independently of one another. Tasks had to include calculation exercises, argumentation, representation, interpretation, and “the application of mathematics in non-mathematical areas.” Students were allowed only a calculator, a formula booklet, and a normal distribution table as aids. Proposed exam tasks were sent to the local education authority for approval before administration, but were rarely challenged. As a result, every classroom of seniors took a different exam every year, with minimal comparability even within the same school building.
In 2014, following nationwide calls for a common test that would reduce subjectivity, allow for comparability, and ensure students had acquired basic mathematical competencies, schools began administering the standardized school leaving exam (SSLE). The SSLE format has changed a bit over the years, but today it covers four general content areas—algebra and geometry, functional dependences, analysis, and probability and statistics—with standalone and inter-related problem sets created annually by the Austrian Federal Ministry of Education, Science, and Research. In addition to the goals listed above, more emphasis was placed on student aptitude with technology, and so they are allowed to use higher level technological aids (such as GeoGebra and graphing calculators) without restriction during testing.
Data on teachers’ experience of the testing change come from interviews with ten upper secondary math teachers who had significant teaching experience covering both the teacher-created and standardized exam eras. They were conducted from March to May of 2023. This is obviously a very small subset of all math teachers in Austria, and all of them volunteered to participate in the questionnaires, but even the limited anecdotal evidence obtained is valuable.
Teachers almost universally viewed the goal of standardization as positive, and reported that they believed that the competencies emphasized by the SSLE are valuable to students. They were less positive, however, regarding what they view as a change in their roles from a traditional instructor to more of a “trainer” who pursues a common goal with the students—as if they all needed to work together to pass somebody else’s test. All teachers felt that they needed to focus the curriculum they covered in class on those areas to be tested, thereby “teaching to the test.” Whether they were able to include more concepts depended on how long the SSLE material took. Two teachers noted with some dissatisfaction that they regularly needed to justify to their students any time spent on non-SSLE content. A majority of teachers reported ditching most or all of the official textbook in favor of old SSLE problem sets, and using the advanced technological aids at least weekly after the switchover to the new test. While some teachers expressed negativity about the loss of technology-free teaching, others reported working without the aids at first to build competency and then introducing them later as test time approached.
A majority of teachers reported increased cooperation with one another after SSLE was introduced, especially within schools. This likely reflected the fact that creating individual tests was no longer required, and every math teacher now had to equip their students to pass the same test. Interestingly, the new comparability of scores led to some teacher-reported competition between schools. Teacher satisfaction with SSLE—and all the changes the test has wrought—has increased in the years since it was introduced, reflecting both a growing familiarity in and comfort with what is required, and (in a few cases) resignation that the old-school exams aren’t ever coming back. Some ongoing logistical issues as reported by individual teachers include continual tweaks in aspects of the SSLE (more are scheduled between now and 2030), inconsistent and short-notice communication about changes to the exam, and a perceived lowering of rigor in some aspects of exam questions and tasks.
The scope of this survey data is small and limited, but feels useful all the same. There’s no denying that the switch to a standardized test resulted in a shrinkage of the core curriculum and an increase in “teaching to the test” in most math classrooms in Austria. But there appears to be no organized effort to remove SSLE after nearly ten years, and predictable negative responses to the change, often stated loudly and preemptively in other places, were muted here by several important factors.
First, a majority of teachers surveyed understood and accepted the goals of the standardized exam even before it was implemented, and saw them as positive for students. SSLE was, in fact, a test worth teaching to. Second, many teachers found ways to exercise their own autonomy and creativity while the official curriculum contracted—even if it took a few years to learn the ins-and-outs of SSLE before they could do so. Third, the increase in cooperation that arose among math teachers who had previously been systematically siloed was seen as a positive outcome despite any lingering concerns they may have had about the testing changes.
This is a small subset of teachers; surely there were many with other viewpoints. But the fact that these few tolerated the switch and found numerous positive aspects feels like proof that more could manage it with enough buy-in, support, and concrete evidence showing that “teaching to the test” isn’t the end of the world.
SOURCE: Christoph Ableitinger and Johanna Gruber, “Standardized school-leaving exam in mathematics: manifold effects on teaching, teacher cooperation and satisfaction,” Frontiers of Education (March 2024).
