Quote:
Originally Posted by Clodfobble
<snip>
Standardized testing is not the only way, but it is currently the default way to have national standards.
But the testing itself very much gets in the way of actual learning,
and then when the children aren't doing well the justification is
that we need stricter standards, and more frequent testing.
All of which is designed and sold to the state by corporations, not actual teachers.
|
Sorry Clod, but you may have made it sound as if non-standized testing
could be better than standardized testing. I doubt that is what you mean.
Or do you feel there is an alternative to tests and/or grading students ?
I know I'm liberal, but that sounds a bit progressive, even for me.
I fail to see the argument that tests (necessarily ?) interfers with actual learning.
Of course there will be always be testing of some sort,
just as there will be grades on report cards because
parents want some indication of how their kids are doing in school.
Likewise, citizens want to know how their well their school system
is doing as compared with others in the city/state/nation.
And even more importantly, if students are graduating high school and
are not actually prepared for "college or career" in terms of being able
to understand and communicate at the expected levels, then they are missing
their basic right to an education.
And, while I certainly want to limit the power and monopolies of corporations,
I think it is quite misleading to say "actual teachers" are not involved.
From all I've read on CC, it looks to me as though "actual teachers"
are involved at all levels, and that CC goes out of it's way to assure
that teachers are not being told how or what to teach.
I am not trying to be an advocate of Common Core, but it appears more and more
that a great deal of politics is unnecessarily entering the national discussion about it.