No Child Left Unstressed
I remember how he had argued that the standardized testing required under No Child Left Behind would improve schools to improve because they'd provide objective assessments of how children are learning. What about the pressure these tests bring to kids? What about the time these tests would eat up, not only for the test taking but for the preparation for the tests? He essentially shrugged that all off. If teachers don't apply pressure, these kids wouldn't feel any different than taking any other test, he said.
Now that my oldest daughter has gone through this testing for a couple years, I'm seeing how absurd his thinking was. Even at my daughter's high achieving elementary school, they've spent probably two weeks have the kids taking practice tests. Some of the kids are even spending time after school getting "tutored" for the test. That doesn't factor into how the curriculum has been changed to make the kids better prepared for the test. And then they spend almost a full week taking the tests.
We've told our daughter to relax, the tests are really to evaluate the school overall, not individual students, but she hears otherwise from teachers. (One year, the teacher told the class: "This is the most important test you'll take all year.") This year, she had the misfortune of getting a virus. She wanted to go to school anyway to take the test because she didn't want to have to make it up later. So she's dragging herself to school, sitting through hours of this stressful testing...and to what end?
I don't think it's improving education at my kids' or their friends' schools. Could it be lifting standards at the struggling schools? I'd like to see hard research that shows that.
Stumble It!
posted by pam at 9:38 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home