|
|
|
|
|
by kingkilr
5194 days ago
|
|
An alternative to what? Standardized testing? How about, non-standard testing? Do we have such a dearth of qualified teachers that we think we need to strip the people in charge of the classroom of any discretion? What sort of cognitive dissonance does it take to say, "Gee, this person can teach our kids the material, but they probably have no ability to evaluate whether the kids learned it". |
|
The fact that standardized tests measure students is a secondary benefit. The entire point of No Child Left Behind was to identify the worst teachers and either 1) get them to improve or 2) get them to leave. I wholly agree with this goal. Unlike most of the people making educational policy, I'm still young enough to remember my high school experience. I remember math teachers that didn't know how to solve the problems they assigned. I remember civics teachers who knew less about the American Revolution than I did. And I didn't grow up in the inner city. I grew up in a fairly prosperous suburb. My school was regarded as being in the top 10% of schools in the state. I shudder to think how bad the teachers are in high poverty schools.
To get at your point more directly, I don't think there's any cognitive dissonance at all. I think the basic premise is being questioned: "Is this person qualified to teach our kids the material?" Do I agree with the way we're measuring how the material is being learned? No. Our current standardized tests are like yardsticks, rather than calipers. But even a yardstick is better than guesswork.