Quote:
Originally posted by Spanky
Wouldn't anyone argue that a teacher should give absolutely no tests? Of course not. How else would they know that the kids are learning? Yet at the same time people argue that we don't give standardized tests, but without these tests how do we know the teachers are teaching? We don't and as a consequence they aren't.
There is simply no reason to not test.
|
You're still just not getting it.
It is the concept of standardized tests not administered by professionals that irks me (at least), not testing per se. It is the notion that the tests are put above direct individual assessment.
If you're looking for an advocate of a rigorous education with plenty of hard work, I would be one. I'm deeply appalled by the quality of teachers we have teaching our kids - a product of the incentives provided and the way school systems are managed. But I'm even more appalled at the specious conservative philosophy that posits testing as a panacea.
If you're going to go spending $25 billion on education, I'd focus on class size, special education and direct instruction so that if a kid is failing, they'd get the educational boot camp they need, not just thrown back into the same class where they failed to learn it to begin with. Like I said, a model more focused on Head Start.
Threaded Mode