Posted on 08/23/2007 7:54:47 AM PDT by SmithL
"MANY AMERICANS do not believe that the success of our students or of our schools can be measured by one test administered on one day, and I agree with them. This is not fair," Rep. George Miller, D-Martinez, told the National Press Club last month.
As the House Education and Labor Committee he chairs is expected to roll out a draft for legislation to reauthorize the 2001 No Child Left Behind bill, Miller and fellow Democrats want to change NCLB testing.
Currently, the law requires that students be tested in math and reading every year between third-grade and eighth-grade, then once in high school. Miller explained he would add "multiple measures of success. These measures can no longer reflect just basic skills and memorization, but rather critical thinking and the ability to apply knowledge to new and challenging contexts."
On the one hand, Miller is right to push to improve NCLB. He wants to allow states to apply graduation rates toward their yearly NCLB progress scores and also would have states include history and science test scores.
On the other hand, when the education establishment touts testing for "critical thinking," that can be code for: Maybe the kid can't read, but look at the bright side, he's smart.
And when educrat groups - such as the Forum on Educational Accountability - recommend that NCLB add "comprehensive assessments systems," which would include portfolios (essays, drawing, reports) in order to offer "rich and challenging educational goals," beware. What sounds like more sophisticated testing could end up being more confusing and inconclusive. A kid who can draw does not mean a kid who can multiply.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Nonesense! These tests measure basic reading comprehension and math skills. These skills are readily measurable and will afford consistent and reliable results. A student could take the test ten days in a row, or one hundred days in a row, and the scores would be very consistent. There is no luck involved. A student is not going to score in the 10th percentile on one day and the 90th the next. The real problem is not in the tests, but in the level of learning.
“These measures can no longer reflect just basic skills and memorization, but rather critical thinking and the ability to apply knowledge to new and challenging contexts.”
It will be interesting to see how they set standards for acceptable performance in this concept. Problem solving, getting the right answer, is already incorporated into standards of learning tests. Asking kids to figure out how to do something they have not done before would be interesting but should be highly correlated to the results on the other tests... On the other hand I smell a whiff of political correctness slipping into the process if George Miller is involved.
The only problem with comprehensive tests I ever had was the “time” alloted for taking the tests. I always thought that there should have been more time than what was given...........
I used to really enjoy the aptitude/skilss tests we periodically took while I was in elementary, junior high and high school.
I did much better on those than I did with my grades!
Of course, I didn’t learn anything about “spellcheck” back then.
“MANY AMERICANS do not believe that the success of our students or of our schools can be measured by one test administered on one day, and I agree with them.”
I agree, but, given that teachers routinely refuse to be measured in any other way, I’ll take what I can get — as imperfect as it is.
“”MANY AMERICANS do not believe that the success of our students or of our schools can be measured by one test administered on one day, and I agree with them. This is not fair,” Rep. George Miller, D-Martinez.”
That’s right. They should have to pass multiple tests on repeated occasions. This would ensure against fluke passing based on luck.
Of course it is fair, i.e., "free from favoritism or self-interest or bias or deception; conforming with established standards or rules; showing lack of favoritism; impartial."
During my career as a college professor, I have heard far too many students whine, "That's not fair." Usually they do not really want fair treatment, but special treatment. Thus, the student who misses a deadline thinks he should be allowed to turn in an assignment without penalty. Another student who earned a "C" asks for an "A", regardless of the established standards.
My guess is that Representative Miller objects precisely because the tests are fair. He would prefer that favoritism be shown to some groups.
I found the comprehensives BORING!! I was usually done in half the time or less. That wasn’t so bad, but the nuns wouldn’t let anyone out of the room until ALL papers were in.
I finished some ahead of “time” and some at the mark. But some I had leftover problems on, as did many others. It seems the test was to see “how fast” you could solve a problem, not “if”..................
On the other hand, before NCLB a lot of schools just warehoused their IEP kids until they could “graduate”. Now they have to try and improve their ability to score on the test without help.
Why not a single test administered on a single day seems to work pretty well for certifying lawyers, doctors and a host of other professions not mention issuing driver's licenses.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.