Read all of the articles on the following link. In your initial response, give your reactions to each (do you agree/disagree, why?). Support these reactions with personal details or relate them to other texts (from the website or our book).
In your replies to each other, add an example from your scholastic experience that either supports or challenges one of the author's claims.
http://bcs.bedfordstmartins.com/barnetbedau8e/pages/bcs-main.asp?v=&s=14000&n=00020&i=14020.01&o=
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
My first initial reaction to the Education World article was that your test scores really say whether you are going to the next grade level or not. My succeeding reaction was that school officials only care whether or not the scores are rising. As I read on, the article talked about how “unfortunate kids” won’t test the same as “middle class and richer kids” because they will go to poorer schools. They desire to have students take a remedial course and then take the test for a second time, so that the kids that previously failed the test could be qualified to go to the next grade level, if they passed on the second attempt. The article also says that many states involve an exit exam for all graduating high school seniors. This assessment would test them on basic knowledge, on a tenth grade level. If you are testing a senior on tenth grade work why don’t we immediately let tenth graders graduate, and not make them remain in school two more years? When I almost finished the article I saw where they said that “retaining students raises dropout rates” (Neill, Fair Test),This made me think that of course more students would drop out if they had to stay in school for an additional year or so. At the very end they told you what the state believed needed to happen before the child in question could be promoted to the next grade level, they had to do things from attending summer school to getting approval from the schools superintendent. I think that this article has several good points, but there are a few that, I, actually do not agree with. For example, poorer children do not achieve very good test scores because the schools they regularly attend are poorer as well. States now, have public schools so any child can receive and education, generally if a less fortunate student goes to school they are receiving they are receiving the same education as a more fortunate student they should get about the same test scores(granted if they work just as hard). Therefore I believe that this statement is incorrect when saying that money is an issue.
In the next article, Talking to Your Child’s Teacher about Standardized Tests, they ask questions that you would possibly ask your child’s teacher. They ask questions from what are standardized tests, to how do schools use standardized tests. They go on to say the answers to every single one of the questions. Although this article was very informative I did not enjoy it as greatly. It seemed to me as though the writer just wanted to save the parents a step, and keep them from speaking with the teachers.
The following article, Standardized Tests Rob Kids of Best Teaching, was well written, but to me it seemed contradict itself. The title seemed to be in opposition to standardized tests, but several of the paragraphs seemed to be for them. It talks about how they tell teachers what they have to teach, which in my opinion is not always a good thing, and how it limits the chills imagination. But it states, as well, that it protects students against bad teachers, but in defense to that, from my own experience, it does not always to that. Teachers can still not teach to the test. It states that the test restricts teachers from a “teachable moment”, like bird nests, but does it actually? Can’t a teacher find a method to incorporate that into a lesson plan? The article also states that the tests take away the time for a child’s imagination to work and that if schools can’t let the imagination work, then when will it ever will, because we have replaced traditions like trick-or-treating with community events, and Valentines Day with commercial cards. But not every day is a holiday so why can’t they utilize it after school, or while they are with friends at recess? They can!
The final article, Standardized Testing: Measuring What Matters, was my least favorite in all of the four. It didn’t really provide me with a great deal information at all. I cannot really talk much about this article except that I didn’t like it, and that it didn’t answer hardly any of our class questions.
The Education World article said that schools in Louisiana had a new form of testing. This testing can hold a student back if he or she does not pass the reading or math test proficiently. I think this is a good idea. Math and reading, especially at the fourth and eighth grade levels, are important for everyday use. If Spotsylvania had this, more rednecks may be literate. The article also said that the tests discriminate against poor children because they almost never get as good of an education. I disagree with this. Just because their families are financially challenged does not mean that the child will have to have less skills in life.
I think the kidsource page would be beneficial to many children. It offered good advice and questions to know the answers to. One question I didn't agree with, however, was "Should my child practice taking tests?" I don't think anyone should have to practice taking tests. Often the minimum passing requirements are low, such as 50%, like on the SOL's.
I didn't completely agree with the third article. It was against standardized testing. The author claimed that the tests caused teachers to not teach the spontaneous and the odd, which is what students remember. That's not true. I have several teachers that still do this despite SOL's. Details like this depend on the teacher, not the presence of a test.
I did not like the fourth article at all. Who says that "students are being tested to an extent unmatched in society."? I think Americans, have been tested less and have academically fallen behind many other countries. How can a standardized test be full of material in one's long term memory? The tests cover multiple school years.
Heather stated that teachers could still incorprate many things into a lesson plan despite standardized tests. I agree. My sixth grade sister, for example, had a cooking project due for her reading class last week. I'm sure that had nothing to do with her SOL's.
Article 1
The first article is about test taking in Ohio. I don't really know if you can agree/disagree with this one because it doesn't really have something for you to agree with. It's mostly facts and statistics. Although it does quote Gardner/Neill vs Norton, they contrast so you can't agree/disagree with the article. You can, however, agree/disagree with one of the people they quoted. And I agree with Gardner and Neill when they say that tests are taken much too seriously and that a child should not have so much wait and pressure laid on them as a life making decision.
Article 2
Again, I do not think you can agree/disagree with this article at all. It is informative. I gives tips. I think that the tips would be helpful (if I had a child). Is that agreeing? If so, then I agree.
Article 3
This article is about how "wonder" is lost from the classroom, and I agree. Teachers have become much too limited on what they teach because of what they have been told the students have to know. They focus too much on making sure they pass the test, and not enough on making sure that they actually learn something.
Article 4
The final article is about how the tests that students are taking are measured unfairly. And that students are not being taught actually information, but just how to pass a test. It is unfair to say that one student from a different place then another is more smart then another based on test scores, because the grading scale was most likely different in the two schools. I agree that unless the same test is given, and the same grading scale used, then yes these tests are unfair.
I agree with what Wanda wrote for article's one and two.
Article 1
My impression of this statistical article was that it gives you no room to take a side. Facts overrule opinion, but if there was a side to take of the situations given Norton had a valid point. He states that the scores are up and need for remediation is lower. It's obviously helping so why stop?
Article 2
After reading this article, I felt they lacked evidence proving that the testing actually worked. They failed to address the skills children use to adapt to test taking. This Article was fairly ineffective for someone who has experienced the test taking process. It's possible one who is fairly gullable or moronic could believe this.
Article 3
Teachers do tend to lose their enthusiasm and passion in their teaching career. This results in poor teaching and a dull environment for the children. Liven up the classroom and the children probably will participate.
Article 4
Although this article offered very few facts, it was convincing by proving one argument. The test taking often is just for statistics and often is unfair to students who don't take tests at an optimum level.
Wanda, when you state that you disagree with the fourth article, do you mean that you disagree with their opinion about standardized testing or testing in general? I disagree with standardized testing because you can guess your way through, but if you're forced to learn the material and be given a variety of tests, then I can see how it benefits you.
Article 1
I agree with the article about how students need to pass the tests to get promoted to the next grade. I disagreed with one point in the article, the fact that students only need to pass reading and math. That's almost like saying that science and social studies are unimportant so don't try too hard.
Article 2
I felt like this article was very informative. I enjoyed reading the "How Can You Help Your Child" section, especially the second statement saying, "Don't judge your child on the basis of a test score." I think my mom needs to read that, because I am not a strong test taker and she always gets mad when I don't do well on one.
Article 3
The fact that teachers are restricted to teaching certain topics that are going to be on a test at the end of the year is quite gloomy. I don’t think teachers should be restricted to teaching to a test that only tests students on the bare minimum that they learned throughout the year. Some teachers do like to throw some oddball information out, and it is what the students remember like Wanda said.
Article 4
I have two opinions on this article. Kohn asked if we were "measuring intelligence and practical ability, or are we simply measuring test-taking ability?" I believe that we are getting tested on both, because we won't be able to answer all the questions from our memory so throughout the years we have learned how to find the loopholes in the answers. Kohn's last statement made a lot of sense. I honestly can't remember most of the things I learned a few years ago, but yet at the time I passed the tests and quizzes with flying colors. That made me see Kohn's point of how standardized tests are useless.
Aggy, I definitly agree with you on the second article about how you can't exactly agree or disagree. It was all about tips and what a standardized test was. The only thing that you can really have an opinion on are the tips given. It's either yes i agree with that tip or no that tip does nothing for me.
I agree with sara when she says that the first article didn't give you room to take a side because it really didn't.
Heather: When you challenge the author's assertion that money equals better education, I'm not sure I get your argument. Just because schools are "public" and standards are universal, doesn't mean education is the same everyhwere. Think about it, a poor inner-city school in Richmond vs. a suburb of DC. Parents at the first may have a high school diploma, at the second, they have professional degrees and graduate school experience. How much basic education does the teacher need to do? How much time can they spend on extension activities and teachable moments?
They say that before a kid comes to Kindegarten their reading scores have pretty much been set. Kids from lower-economic households without a culture of school, learning and college, enter kindegarten with a three million word (understood) deficit when compared to those who come from a culture of learning and higher SES.
Compare Berkeley Elementary to others in the county. Does my counter-argument ring true?
Post a Comment