[CatoRenasci]

The real objection to standardized testing, of course, is that it gives results that the consumers of the tests -- parents, teachers and administrators don't want to hear: some students are brighter than others, all other things being equal, and some students have prepared better than others. Some learn the material covered or have a better aptitude for the sort of reasoning the tests measure.

The problems with standardized testing are many, but hardly insurmountable. The objection to standardized testing became serious when it was noticed during the civil rights movement that minorities did not do well, even with massive amounts of aid. Since the improvement in the inputs (money, teacher time) could not be at fault given liberal educational theory assumptions, the fault must therefore lie in the tests. Quod Erat Demonstrandam.

[KC_for_Freedom]

Good point, I had forgotton that old canard. You know everyone is equal, that means equally capable of acheivement, thus if acheivement tests show we are not equal the tests must be at fault. (Maybe if we did them in ebonics?) Ha Ha.

It is part of the PC multicultural ideal to have anything that is competitive disallowed. Think no dodgeball, baseball without scores being kept, and testing with no A's or F's.

We need to recognize as soon as possible that we are not all equal. Not all rocket scientists, and not all professional athletes or rock stars. This is part of growing up. Parents learn how to deal with it and kids learn the "facts of life". The fact that this runs counter to one of our political parties (one that recently got the cr*p beat out of them) should not be part of the debate. And it would not be if most teachers were not part and parcel of the democrat party.