Back to Thoughts

Thoughts on Educating

2/21/2008 - An Apgar Score for Learning

"The Apgar score changed everything.   It was practical and easy to calculate, and it gave clinicians at the bedside immediate feedback on how effective their care was.  In the rest of medicine, we are used to measuring dozens of specific things...but we have no routine measure that that puts the data together to grade how the patient as a whole is faring.  We have only an impression of how we're performing - and sometimes not even that." (190)

The Apgar score (invented and published by Virginia Apgar in 1953) rates the condition of babies at birth from zero to ten.  An infant gets two points for being pink all over, two points for crying, two for taking good breaths, two for moving all four limbs, and two if its heart rate is over a hundred.  A score of ten means the child is born in perfect condition.  A score of four or less is trouble.  The score gives an overall impression, but also focuses healthcare staff on certain indicators: pinkness, crying, breathing, moving, and heart rate.  Improvement in any of these areas means improvement in the baby's overall Apgar score. 

What we need is an Apgar score for learning.  Standardized test scores don't always indicate much in the way of what students really know and can do.  In The Truth About Testing, James Popham maintains that standardized tests often obscure important student learning.  They point more to a student's economic background than his/her true skills and achievement.  I'll write more about Popham's book in a later entry.  

What would our indicators for learning be?  Looking at the components of an Apgar score, I propose the following: two points for attitude regarding learning, two points for completion of work, two points for participation in extracurricular activities, two points for reading independently outside assigned texts, and two for future ambition.  A score of four or less would mean trouble.  A score of eight or more would mean the student is in good shape.  A score of this nature would focus us on the indicators because improvement in any of the indicators would mean improvement in the student's overall score.  It's also clear that improvement could not be derived from a workbook program, additional testing, or scripted lessons.  Educators would need to focus on those things that improve the indicators, in effect focus making students happier, more motivated, and more ambitious when it comes to their own learning.  I know this would result in higher standardized test scores.  Right now, however, we depend on the home to bolster these indicators while we drill away with curriculum and discipline, and the truth of the matter is that many homes - especially those plagued by poverty and family instability - do not have the capacity for this.  They're busy just trying to get by.          

Gawande, A.  (2007).  Better: A surgeon's notes on performance.  New York: Picador.
Popham, James.  (2001).  The truth about testing.  Alexandria VA: ASCD. 

Back to Thoughts