Blogcritics: Comments on Preparing for the last war

Comment by bhw

Mon, 27 Dec 2004 22:01:22 EST

Now he's really going to get pissed because his name is Harry, not Henry.

Comment by bhw

Mon, 27 Dec 2004 22:00:31 EST

maybe they should fit into the mold...and stop wasting our kids time. Or maybe the mold should change if it's not working. Or maybe there should be more than one mold, since people are not all alike and learn differently and thrive in different environments. all the things you talk about doing cost money... Yes, they do. But so do the results of poor schools. And if the things I'm talking about work better than what we have now, which is a one-size-supposedly-fits-all system that doesn't work for all, then it will be worth it. that's all we've been doing is giving the educational system in this country more and more money and it just seems to get worse and worse. And what does that tell you? That pouring more money and effort into the same thing without seeing a change in the results is a smart thing to do? Isn't one of the symptoms of insanity to keep doing the same thing but expecting a different result the next time? Well, that's what NCLB does: it requires schools to do more of the same thing. But this system worked before, didn't it? You seem pretty literate! It worked for SOME. I was one of the kids that was able to work inside the mold. My older brother was not. You'd be surprised at the difference between the educations we got at the same schools, and even with some of the same teachers, and of course with the same parents. Maybe those beatings you got worked better than you think. Ha! I wouldn't call them beatings, though. But we were hit. I think a few things have changed since the good old days when teachers were permitted to hit kids. One thing is obviously that teachers generally aren't allowed to hit kids anymore. I agree with you that that's a good thing. But another thing that has changed is that school districts are now required to educate all the children in the community, even the ones who are difficult or whose parents are not going to be helpful in the process. But seriously, it's not like problems didn't exist in the past. My mother went to public school in Newark, NJ in the 50's. You know, that Donna Reed era when everything was perfect? Well, she's told me on more than one occasion that the black kids in her school were, as a group, the ones who struggled academically. We have always had problems in our schools with providing a quality education to all kids from all backgrounds. As far as Montesorri goes...the way I hear it, you need a pretty hefty wallet That's for private school. The Montessori model is now being implemented in some public schools. and I don't wanna pay that kind of money to educate some punk kid that doesn't want to learn anyway. That punk kid, like all children, started life with an innate thirst for learning and an innate curiosity. Where did it go? Is it only his fault or his parents' fault? Why is it never the school's fault? And at what age is it okay to write off a kid who "doesn't want to learn anyway"? And revamping the entire education system would cost way way to much money and it's not necessary. I would argue that it *is* necessary and wouldn't cost too much money. It might cost more than we're spending now, but probably just in the short run. In the long run, costs could be streamlined, I think. The bottom line is that the education system in this country needed something...the guy that was there for 8 years didn't do a FUCKING thing about it... Not true, but I'm not going to get into it. a new guy came in and at least tried to create some accountability and all I see is bitching! You see bitching because he's not just trying to create accountability. He's created a system that is underfunded and therefore actually costs districts more money. He's also created a system that's designed to take money away from public schools and put it in the pockets of private companies. I'm glad that states are creating a standard that I can use to help me judge a school. States were doing this before NCLB. If the tests cover the basics and teachers have to teach so that kids can pass the tests, shouldn't the teachers be teaching the basics? Sure, teachers should teach the basics. But they were doing that before the tests, weren't they? Now that we have these "accountability" tests, the problem is that the basics will only be taught in a way that prepares students for one kind of assessment, a multiple choice test. The test is determining and limiting the kinds of instruction teachers can use in the classroom. A good educational standard is assessment-independent. That is, it states the goal but not the method of achieving or measuring it, so that teachers can customize their lessons and assessments to fit their particular students' needs and learning styles. When the standard implies a certain type of assessment, then it limits the ways in which the teacher can approach it. So you get cookie-cutter instruction that focuses on answering mutliple choice questions correctly. There are a million other problems with it, but in general, when you have only one type of assessment for determining success or failure, teachers will teach to that assessment because that's all that counts. And students will learn to care about only what's on the test ["Is this going to be on the test?" or "Will this count toward my grade?"] and then stop when they get to something that's not on the test. This is true in general of any schoolwork that's graded -- students will do just enough to get the grade they and their parents can live with, and no more. I can go on about this forever, but at some point, that poor schlump Henry Forbes is going to get pissed.

Comment by andy marsh

Mon, 27 Dec 2004 21:13:01 EST

bhw - Like I said..you read WAY to much into things...I don't mean to ridicule, I type the things that come into my mind. I lack tact, I have all my life. I'm not PC, at all! and yeah, you're right...I think if it works for my kid then it should work for your kid...why do we have to work around the problem children(I'm not saying you have a problem child)...maybe they should fit into the mold...and stop wasting our kids time. all the things you talk about doing cost money...that's all we've been doing is giving the educational system in this country more and more money and it just seems to get worse and worse. But this system worked before, didn't it? You seem pretty literate! Maybe those beatings you got worked better than you think. As far as Montesorri goes...the way I hear it, you need a pretty hefty wallet and I don't wanna pay that kind of money to educate some punk kid that doesn't want to learn anyway. And revamping the entire education system would cost way way to much money and it's not necessary. The bottom line is that the education system in this country needed something...the guy that was there for 8 years didn't do a FUCKING thing about it...a new guy came in and at least tried to create some accountability and all I see is bitching! I'm glad that states are creating a standard that I can use to help me judge a school. I personally don't think they need it, but I also don't think it's a bad thing. They already have the Stanford 9's and I can't think what the other set of tests are right off hand. They already measure students performance. If the tests cover the basics and teachers have to teach so that kids can pass the tests, shouldn't the teachers be teaching the basics? If the test checks performance in math, shouldn't the teacher be teaching math? Wouldn't the teacher then be teaching what's needed to pass the test? When I was a navy instructor, we gave tests and practical exams. I never wanted to see one of my students fail a test so I made sure that I covered ALL THE MATERIAL. You see, that way, I knew that my students had what they needed to pass the test. I didn't teach the test. I taught the material that the test covered. Now, if you have a problem with the tests your state is giving, don't blame that on the president. He mandated that schools show a measurable standard. What's so wrong with that idea?

Comment by bhw

Mon, 27 Dec 2004 20:32:42 EST

Andy, if you don't consider the ideas laughable, then why did you ridicule them?

Comment by andy marsh

Mon, 27 Dec 2004 19:53:51 EST

bhw - you can call me out on anything...I have no problem with that...but haughty? laughable? because I don't agree with you...that makes me haughty? makes my opinions laughable? I respond to what I see written...I don't consider your opinions laughable... I maybe a self-centered egotistical bastard...but I'm not haughty!!!

Comment by andy marsh

Mon, 27 Dec 2004 19:48:49 EST

Why is that? I don't know...maybe because it's always worked in the past? How did we manage? How did our parents manage? What's changed? If not the attitudes of the people we've been talking about...parents...teachers...administrators...students...if it worked before...why isn't it working now?

Comment by bhw

Mon, 27 Dec 2004 19:29:44 EST

I know about Montesorri, I have a relative that went to one in NYC. I'm not impressed. You don't have to be. Other people are. Other people find value in a different style of education than is currently offered in the pubic schools. But you only want the model that works for you and your kids and the rest of the families be damned. Don't try other methods that might work for those troublemakers -- just kick them out! One of the things that strikes me about this thread is that everyone and everything is to blame for what goes wrong in schools ... except the model of education itself. It's the parents or the teachers or the administrators or the bad kids who don't want to learn, but it just cannot be the way education itself is handled. Why is that?

Comment by bhw

Mon, 27 Dec 2004 19:16:15 EST

Life is not school, Andy. YOUR life might be, but not everyone's is. And I'm not getting shitty with you, I'm just responding to the things you have said. I stand corrected on your background as an instructor. But I have a background in both adult and child education and I can tell you that there are significant differences between them. So I can only imagine the differences in teaching military personnel from teaching in the corporate world, not to mention teaching kids. I've never hit my daughters. I never said you did. I was talking about how I'm not going to do what my parents did, partially because it didn't work. Andy, you say you didn't laugh at other options? You ridiculed them and jumped to conclusions: I guess we should have school sports with no scoring? Track meets with no winners? No National Honors Society? Oh no, your way EVERYONE would make NHS. Kid must get an awful shock when s/he sits down to take that SAT or ACT! But hey, your way, teachers don't have to show any REAL progress! They can just TELL you they're teaching your kid and you, being the trusting soul that you are, will believe them! Focusing on how they are doing...as in, doing it right? Following direction? You're right, that's a bad idea! HA!!! I bet those studies you're talking about are NEA studies.... You're one of those parents that let's their kid throw a tantrum in the grocery store, aren't you? You try to "reason" with your 5 or 6 year old??? Andy, you definitely have a pattern in these BC comments. You say a bunch of stuff and make assumptions and generalizations, and then you claim you never did it. Am I supposed to just let it go when you jump to conclusions and misrepresent what I'm talking about?

Comment by andy marsh

Mon, 27 Dec 2004 18:30:49 EST

haughty??? Me??? I actually have been and am right now, an instructor. I'm a navy trained Master Training Specialist, actually. I taught electronics for about 5 1/2 years in the navy. I'm also trained in curriculum development. Right now I work for a company and my function is training. I know about Montesorri, I have a relative that went to one in NYC. I'm not impressed. I never said any other options were laughable. I've never hit my daughters. All I said was what worked for me specifically. YOu read WAY to much into shit don't you? I said kick them out and let their parents deal with them. But I get the feeling I saw you in the grocery store one day...letting your kid stomp and scream and kick...that why you calling me haughty??? I never called you any names...Never said anything about your opinions other than we're miles apart...why you gotta get shitty with me? Haughty...laughable... And if you think that performance assesment ain't a grade...well...I don't know what to say...get a shitty one and see if the grade doesn't affect your pay! That's the grade on the test of life...I see it every 2 weeks... life is school, bhw...and it's full of tests...either you pass, fail or get left back!

Comment by bhw

Mon, 27 Dec 2004 18:12:32 EST

Andy, are you sitting down? I have something to tell you: the Earth is not flat. Why are you so afraid of ideas that are new or different from what you know, to the point that you rant and rave and make assumptions and sweeping generalizations about the people who advocate them? Well, here's another shocker for you: many successfull schools, looooong in existence, do not give grades or tests. Montessori schools fit this mold, for example. They've been around for many decades, and they are founded on the belief that children are natural, active learners who don't need tests or grades to motivate them. Lately, Montessori has become a favorite public school charter model. Guess what: no tests and no grades in these public schools. And the sun will still rise in the morning, Andy. If you actually read Comment 26, I said that authentic assessment and portfolio assessments are good alternatives to tests. Montessori schools do assess their students' progress, they just don't give tests or grades. Why is that so horrible? Plus, you do realize that grades are subjective, don't you? Ever have a teacher bump you up to an A because of your effort, even if your scores didn't add up to an A? That's subjective. Ever have a teacher who was a tougher grader than your friends? That's subjective. Ever think that one of your friends was the teacher's pet and therefore got all the breaks? That's subjective. And therefore, to me, just about meaningless. I just wonder what happens to a child years down the road when they start getting graded in everything they do. It is part of life. Actually, grading is not a part of life; it's a part of school. I've never gotten a grade on any work I've done in the real world, only in school. I have had performance reviews, but those tended to be -- get this -- authentic assessments based on real work in real life, not fabricated tests. You know what part of all that worked the best for me? It wasn't the threat of what might happen in school, it was KNOWING what was gonna happen when I got home. Well, I prefer a school that doesn't use threats to coerce certain behaviors from students. Unfortunately, most public schools do use threats [carrots and sticks, if you will]. And as a parent, I choose not to use the threat of physical violence. My parents used to hit my brothers and me. It wasn't really very effective. If it had been, we would have been hit once and never again. But I definitely recall being hit on more than one occasion. So, maybe my parents liked the feeling of power and retribution, but smacking us didn't keep us from doing things that pissed them off. Andy, you and I are definitely from different educational worlds. All I can say is that I have advocated a having variety of public school models from which parents can choose. What works for one family might not work for another. But you seem to think your limited view of the world -- based on, I would guess, no actual experience as an educator -- is the only way things should be, and that any other options are laughable. I think your haughty attitude, given your lack of knowledge about alternatives to the status quo in education, is laughable.

Comment by andy marsh

Mon, 27 Dec 2004 17:20:55 EST

bhw - Kicking them out of school and letting their parents deal with their BS! They are the reason that they're like that in the first place. That really is the only option left. You know what part of all that worked the best for me? It wasn't the threat of what might happen in school, it was KNOWING what was gonna happen when I got home. You really believe that not grading or testing kids is a good idea? If that's the case, I'd say that there really is nowhere that we can go. The 2 of us are so opposite on this issue that there actually is no middle ground. How do you know if they're actually teaching your child anything? I just wonder what happens to a child years down the road when they start getting graded in everything they do. It is part of life. I guess we should have school sports with no scoring? Track meets with no winners? No National Honors Society? Oh no, your way EVERYONE would make NHS. Kid must get an awful shock when s/he sits down to take that SAT or ACT! But hey, your way, teachers don't have to show any REAL progress! They can just TELL you they're teaching your kid and you, being the trusting soul that you are, will believe them! Focusing on how they are doing...as in, doing it right? Following direction? You're right, that's a bad idea! HA!!! That's the kind of attitude I want working for me...I did it the way I wanted to...not the way you told me to do it! or the right way...but the way I was taught to do stuff in school...any FUCKING way I pleased! I bet those studies you're talking about are NEA studies.... You're one of those parents that let's their kid throw a tantrum in the grocery store, aren't you? You try to "reason" with your 5 or 6 year old??? I'm not trying to be offensive here bhw. Honestly! I think we take a completely different approach on raising our children. But hey, if that works for you...more power to you! I like the fact that my daughter is in honors and Advanced Placement classes. In a class room where the other kids around her WANT to learn. For the most part she's away from the trouble makers. You group kids together and some will be bored to tears and others will be swamped with things they don't understand. And somehow, that's a good thing? Alrighty then!

Comment by bhw

Mon, 27 Dec 2004 16:47:17 EST

Andy, you say you're not condoning corporeal punishment, but then you don't offer an alternative to it after you point out how effective it was with you. What would you recommend teachers do with students who are consistently a problem? If discipline is a problem and you don't recommend "whacking" kids, what DO you recommend?

Comment by bhw

Mon, 27 Dec 2004 16:44:50 EST

There are schools in this country that don't grade because someones "feelings" might get hurt! WTF is that? They don't do it because feelings might get hurt. They do it because they believe giving grades is counter productive to the overall goal of education because grades induce students to focus on how they are doing instead of on what they are doing. In fact, some studies have shown that student performance goes down when students believe the work they're doing will count toward their final grade. A lot of this has to do with the psychology of intrinsic vs. extrinsic motivation and which one is more powerful in education. So, typically, schools that forgo grades aren't concerned with sorting kids into groups by ability/conformance and are more interested in helping kids pursue they're motivated to learn. If I could, I would send my kids to schools that a) don't grade and b) don't test at all.

Comment by andy marsh

Mon, 27 Dec 2004 16:16:28 EST

bhw - you were still allowed to raise your hand and ask questions. You just weren't allowed to ask questions like..How could a virgin have a kid? That one got you a good smack. I don't ever recall getting in trouble for asking questions, other than the one stated above. I DO remember getting in trouble for blurting shit out, or generally disrupting the class. I think the big difference between now and then is class discipline in both private and public schools. I remember my cousins telling me that they usually got a choice between a couple of whacks or detention, they usually took the whacks. In catholic school, you got it all, a couple of whacks, detention and then a couple more whacks when I got home. I'm not advocating corporal punishment! Let me say that again, I'M NOT ADVOCATING CORPORAL PUNISHMENT! I would not want a teacher touching one of my daughters. But all this feel good shit that goes on in schools today is for the birds! There are schools in this country that don't grade because someones "feelings" might get hurt! WTF is that? In this part of VA I think the public schools do an adequate job. My daughters have learned. I just moved back here from AZ and I got to tell you, those public schools suck! I saw a difference in parent attitude out there as well. I went to a school function one night and when it came time to start, none of the parents would shut up! The school admin wouldn't do anything about it...they let the kids start there little show with all these parents talking and BS'ing. It was pathetic. I finally stood up and yelled in the cafeteria, SHOW SOME RESPECT FOR THESE CHILDREN! They finally settled down. I think in this day and age, do to all the PC Bullshit and that's what it is, PC Bullshit, an administrator can't do what I did that night. They might want to, but they can't and that's a big part of the problem with SOME public schools. Steve - I guess we finally did agree on something, that discipline is a problem! As far as Bush goes on this education issue, I'll say this; at least he's trying to do something. Of course your conspiracy theory says he's doing it to try to close public schools down, but I don't believe that. I believe he's doing it because he knows public schools are a problem. They were when he was in TX and nothing's changed. I guess if your boy kerry were president, we could do away with NCLB and just throw more money at it! So, let's see. We can't discipline them, we can't test them, we can't close them, we can't move them to better schools. I guess we'll just leave them the way they are! But just for good measure, let's throw some more money at them!

Comment by bhw

Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:44:39 EST

Andy, you continue to say how much better your Catholic school education was than your public school education. My understanding of Catholic school education, handed down by my father, is that it's a sit-down-and-listen-to-the-lecture-and-speak-when-spoken-to environment. Maybe that's not universal, but none of my peers who went through Catholic school offered a different picture.

Comment by Steve S

Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:20:20 EST

Steve - you're a SCREAMING liberal and no matter what title you try to give yourself, I think you'll ALWAYS be a screaming liberal. LOL. What I am trying to do is turn how the debates go, back to something more fair. The Right continually defines the Right. The Right continually defines the Left (and erroneously at that). And then the debate goes from there, and the Left has to defend a position that it doesn't even hold because it got labeled as holding that position by the Right. I'm not a debater, just someone who sees how discussions between the Left and Right go, and I'm not letting it go that way anymore where I am involved. And right now, attempting to make the debate more fair, it is making me come across as screaming. So that's a label I'll have to wear, until I can figure out the best way to approach it. Apparently, the definition of a screaming liberal, is one who will not let the Right define and co-opt the debate. So far Andy, in two days, I've had the Right tell me here at BC, that the ideology of Progressivism is to make all incomes equal, that it's the equivalent of slavery, that it's intent is to deny your kids a quality education,, the list goes on. None of it is right. I have to speak out and say 'no, that's not right'. If that makes me a screaming liberal, then so be it. I guess my kids should be punished because someone elses kids can't speak english? IN AMERICA!!! That's liberal thinking! See what I mean here? There isn't a liberal around, including myself, who says "The children of immigrants should learn english at the expense of Andy's kids". you want MORE of my taxes No. No. I don't. I never called for a tax increase. Another erroneous comment. THIS IS AMERICA, we speak ENGLISH here! Learn it or LEAVE! How can they learn it, when we now have to spend less time teaching it? Andy, I have said that NCLB is problematic how it is set up. It measures too narrowly and is not good as a stand alone item. Teachers are telling us that it takes away from the education kids need for the real world. So we need testing that can work in conjunction with standardized testing, and be a more accurate reflection on how well kids are learning. Or maybe we should just continue to let them graduate illiterates? No liberal has advocated that. But correcting you (yet again) makes me appear to be 'screaming' at you, doesn't it? Is it an either/or? Under the Bush administration which does not compromise, apparently it is. But in the real world, there are multiple solutions, not just a 'one size band-aid fits all' approach. As far as me never agreeing with Bush, it's because we define the role of government differently. I'm not a polluter, corporatist, opportunist, militarist or demogogic absolutist. You make one comment to bhw here: It has to do with parent involvement and class discipline. That's how you say that kids can get a better education. But how does NCLB address that? If it doesn't (and it clearly doesn't), then NCLB shouldn't be considered an effective remedy as a stand alone tool, should it? Class discipline is a big problem. I'd agree with you on that. My sister says she has to spend more time being a baby sitter and disciplining kids than teaching, because the parents haven't instilled the right values in the kid. There are kids in her class that talk through lessons, that stand up and throw things, that run around, etc. Discipline has had to be curtailed from the educators viewpoint to avoid being sued, but parents aren't instilling it either. Unfortunately, no solution from EITHER side addresses this issue. People don't know how to address it.

Comment by andy marsh

Mon, 27 Dec 2004 12:19:22 EST

I'm not talking about kids asking questions and YOU KNOW it! If you're gonna take the stuff I say and twist it into stupidity then I guess we're done! Happy New Year!

Comment by bhw

Mon, 27 Dec 2004 11:50:59 EST

On another thread, Andy, you said: Administrators make deep into 6 figures and for what? Hiring incapable teachers, promoting BS curricula. They take money away from students and teachers and for the most part perform no useful function other than buffer between the community and teachers that suck! Good teachers rarely have issues with parents, it's the bad ones that need saving! You didn't say ALL, but you surely imply that there is something fundamentally wrong with the role and pay of administrators. This statement shows that you generally believe that they're overpaid in the first place and don't do a good job [hire bad teachers and promote "bs curricula"] in the second place. They "take money away" from teachers and students and perform "no useful function" except to protect the bad teachers they hire from upset parents. How is anyone supposed to think that you DON'T think administrators should be fired? Do you think you've painted a balanced picture of their jobs and their performance? Puhleeze. Also, this last line is telling: d teachers rarely have issues with parents, it's the bad ones that need saving! That statement and other statements you've made about kids "behaving" in class and discipline in schools leads me to believe that you think that "good" teachers just do what they're told [by parents] and "good" students just sit quietly and passively "learn" from these "good" teachers. That's a seriously disturbing view of schools, teachers, students, AND parents. In fact, it sounds a lot like the military to me: take your orders and don't question them. Unfortunately, children aren't soldiers, even though schools seem to be more and more militaristic to me every day. Asking questions shows curiosity and a thirst for knowledge and understanding -- we should encourage it. Sadly, some teachers think the way you do, too, Andy. My daughter had an experience last fall with a public school teacher who rewarded only the quiet kids who literally said nothing all day. This small number of children got a gold sticker at the end of the day, every day, from the teacher. When I asked my daughter what the girl next to her did to earn the gold sticker, my daughter said, "She didn't do anything. She just sits and doesn't say anything." And that's public school education for you. Sit still and don't say a word, and you'll get the label of a "good kid." BTW, that teacher was the example I gave from my school district of someone who doesn't belong in the classroom.

Comment by bhw

Mon, 27 Dec 2004 11:21:02 EST

Andy, class size is a big issue in publi schools. It's not as big of an issue in private schools, because private schools can pick their students. So, naturally, they pick the ones who best fit their classroom model. Public schools have to educate everyone, no matter what their behavior or learning style may be. So I think that in public schools, significantly smaller classes would make a very big difference. It's only one piece of the puzzle, but I think it's a big piece, particularly with younger kids. You can measure a school's performance by doing something called authentic assessment, which is task and real-world oriented instead of being based on multiple choice questions. You can also do portfolio evaluations, which measure student accomplishment over the school year, as opposed to at a fixed point in time during the school year. These types of assessments cost more to implement, but they're far more valuable in determining what individual students really know and can really do. Another problem with standardized tests is that they tell you content areas that students may be weak in. They don't tell you why they're weak in those areas, or at least why they're not performing well on the test in those areas [and those two things are not the same]. So you don't know how to help students improve their test scores because you don't know where they need help. All you have is the wrong circle filled in on the answer sheet. Authentic and portfolio assessments help you see where AND why students need help.

Comment by andy marsh

Mon, 27 Dec 2004 10:10:25 EST

bhw and Steve - can you point to one place in ANY thread where I talked about closing down ALL public schools? Where I said ALL teachers and admin types were bad? I didn't think so. Steve - You can pretend to be "progressive" all you want, you're a SCREAMING liberal and no matter what title you try to give yourself, I think you'll ALWAYS be a screaming liberal. And because of that, it won't matter what Bush and his administration do, it will NEVER be right!(or always be RIGHT). And also Steve, I guess my kids should be punished because someone elses kids can't speak english? IN AMERICA!!! That's liberal thinking! My taxes, educating illegal aliens and you want MORE of my taxes to go to make sure they can speak english too! It's bad enough that schools have to make the effort in this country to print the stuff they send home in multiple languages. THIS IS AMERICA, we speak ENGLISH here! Learn it or LEAVE! bhw - class size MAY be an issue, but I don't think it's the primary issue. As I've stated before, I spent most of my life in private school. Most of those class sizes were over 30. I know for a fact that I got a better education than most of the kids that went to public school. It had nothing to do with class size. It has to do with parent involvement and class discipline. You can pack kids in classes like sardines and if they all behave and they all pay attention then they all should learn. I'm not saying that class size is not an issue, I'm just saying that it's not the MAIN issue. bhw and Steve - since you seem to be the 2 that are dead set against standardized testing, how should schools be measured for success? Or maybe we should just continue to let them graduate illiterates?

Comment by Joe

Thu, 23 Dec 2004 21:06:34 EST

Ha! Well, that was actually an SAT question, but the sentiment still applies.

Comment by bhw

Thu, 23 Dec 2004 20:17:12 EST

Omigod, is that a word problem you just gave me? I suck at word problems!

Comment by Joe

Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:27:12 EST

No, I'm not a great fan of standardized tests, but I think they are probably an adequate measurement of determining whether a minimum standard of performance has been met. I'm not saying that they won't do well on another type of assessment or that there isn't any value to that, but in order to do an apples to apples comparison of school's performance I don't think there is anything better available. To extend your analogy, you've been asked to set up a game of horse between 4 people, up until now you haven't been able to do so for various reasons but you would like to set up an tournament involving several teams.

Comment by bhw

Thu, 23 Dec 2004 18:12:00 EST

I think I did, Joe. Kids are good at different kinds of things. Just because they may not do well on one type of assessment at one school doesn't mean they won't do well on another. Why would you assume [if you do] that standardized tests are a good test of whether or not students can do other things well? I can't shoot a freethrow very well, but I'm a good defender. If you just look at my freethrow scores, what does it tell you about my defense?

Comment by Joe

Thu, 23 Dec 2004 17:45:28 EST

bhw- That's an answer to a question I didn't ask. I agree with your point but again, look at what I'm asking and try to answer that question.