Is Portland over?

Quote: DRich

I am probably okay with the kids not having to learn math beyond the basic multiplication and division. But I think reading is necessary for everyone at least at a high school level.

I do not think they even get multiplication and division. I told the story here before, two girls in a post-secondary trade "college." Trying to teach them to calculate basic poker odds. I forget the exact numbers, but it was say divide 43 by 4. They were as clueless as someone in first grade never learned beyond addition and subtraction. Of course I did not ask addition and subtraction, it was not the 21 table.

The bill essentially just eliminates standardized testing for the next few school years. After that, it creates different categories of High School Diplomas which will kind of pertain to ability.

Anyway, private schools already don’t have to do any state or federal standardized tests, at least, the ones who don’t take any public money. If you want to look up the actual bill, then you’ll see that the credit requirements are pretty much on par with what you’ll find anywhere.

This is pretty much a nothing burger. We already knew teachers were, “Teaching to the test,” anyway and that other things were being done to fudge results and push as many people through as possible. Essentially, this bill just eliminates the pretense that one need actually to have learned something to get a diploma.

The murders in Portland continue at a record pace.

2 more bite the dust in stumptown

Mostly black on black ...

Quote: Mission146

The bill essentially just eliminates standardized testing for the next few school years. After that, it creates different categories of High School Diplomas which will kind of pertain to ability.

Anyway, private schools already don’t have to do any state or federal standardized tests, at least, the ones who don’t take any public money. If you want to look up the actual bill, then you’ll see that the credit requirements are pretty much on par with what you’ll find anywhere.

This is pretty much a nothing burger. We already knew teachers were, “Teaching to the test,” anyway and that other things were being done to fudge results and push as many people through as possible. Essentially, this bill just eliminates the pretense that one need actually to have learned something to get a diploma.

I really do not get the "teaching to the test" complaint. To me it is teachers whining that the class has learning objectives.

Quote: AZDuffman

I really do not get the "teaching to the test" complaint. To me it is teachers whining that the class has learning objectives.

You have one standardized test on one day of the entire school year; that’s bad enough by itself. Anyone could have an off day who actually has a reasonable understanding of the material.

Even that wouldn’t matter if funding weren’t tied to results of those tests. You wouldn’t need to fudge anything then; a person just passes or fails.

The other problem with, “Teaching to the test,” is you don’t get the most out of your students with potential. I hope this doesn’t sound braggadocious, but I’d have passed any of the H.S. standardized tests in eighth grade, and safely, so your students on the higher end of potential already spend most of the school year, ‘Learning,’ what they already know, or could learn in a fraction of the time. Even the, “Advanced Placement,” classes were a cakewalk.

What you end up with is not teaching kids new concepts or ever really challenging the already smart ones. You just drill it into their heads how to pass this one test over and over again.

Quote: Mission146

You have one standardized test on one day of the entire school year; that’s bad enough by itself. Anyone could have an off day who actually has a reasonable understanding of the material.

Even that wouldn’t matter if funding weren’t tied to results of those tests. You wouldn’t need to fudge anything then; a person just passes or fails.

The other problem with, “Teaching to the test,” is you don’t get the most out of your students with potential. I hope this doesn’t sound braggadocious, but I’d have passed any of the H.S. standardized tests in eighth grade, and safely, so your students on the higher end of potential already spend most of the school year, ‘Learning,’ what they already know, or could learn in a fraction of the time. Even the, “Advanced Placement,” classes were a cakewalk.

What you end up with is not teaching kids new concepts or ever really challenging the already smart ones. You just drill it into their heads how to pass this one test over and over again.

No matter what you have to have some standardized measure. As my old boss said, "It is not what you expect, it is what you inspect."

The concepts should be what you have on the test. Lets say you are to teach how to figure the volume of a cylinder, cone, and cube. This is basic stuff, how you get there is up to you. But you cannot have kids not learning it in class then whine "but I wanted to *challenge* them!" You have to teach the concepts.

One important thing is knowing how to take tests. Some people just do multiple choice better and some do not. But, knowing how is showing intelligence and ability in itself. You can "figure out" how to take a test you can solve other problems. In my experience, people who can take tests better rise to other challenges better.

Another problem with "teaching to the test," is the schools will devote their resources to teaching the students who are on the cusp of passing or failing the test. The smart ones will pass anyway, so no need to challenge them. The dumb one won't pass no matter what you do, so you can ignore them.

I favor a free market approach. Let students apply to any school and let schools accept those with the greatest merit. I also favor private school vouchers, not that anyone asked. I'm okay with one standardized test a year, which should be mostly for the purposes of judging the students, not the schools. The schools can use it to decide who to accept, but they should publish averages, to help students pick schools too.

When in doubt, I favor letting people make their own decisions and letting the chips fall where they may.

Quote: Wizard

I favor a free market approach. Let students apply to any school and let schools accept those with the greatest merit. I also favor private school vouchers, not that anyone asked. I'm okay with one standardized test a year, which should be mostly for the purposes of judging the students, not the schools. The schools can use it to decide who to accept, but they should publish averages, to help students pick schools too.

While I also prefer vouchers and say let people pick, I have to say you do have to blame the school at some point. We have inner city schools where there are like 20% or less of the students at grade level performance. At that point you are more or less saying the ones "making the grade" are the smart ones who will do better no matter what. The rest the school is doing nothing with.

The schools make every excuse imaginable. Perhaps the entire school model needs to be changed. I know to me school was 12 years of a gentle form of prison.

Quote: AZDuffman

No matter what you have to have some standardized measure. As my old boss said, "It is not what you expect, it is what you inspect."

The concepts should be what you have on the test. Lets say you are to teach how to figure the volume of a cylinder, cone, and cube. This is basic stuff, how you get there is up to you. But you cannot have kids not learning it in class then whine "but I wanted to *challenge* them!" You have to teach the concepts.

One important thing is knowing how to take tests. Some people just do multiple choice better and some do not. But, knowing how is showing intelligence and ability in itself. You can "figure out" how to take a test you can solve other problems. In my experience, people who can take tests better rise to other challenges better.

I don't see why you have to have a standardized measure for anything, or if you do, just have the standardized tests and (as Wizard proposed) makes the overall results for a school district public information. You can also use the standardized tests to identify problem areas.

That said, just don't incentivize graduation rates in any way and let the state make whatever standards it wants to and on down.

Anyway, the question isn't about getting rid of standardized tests, but rather, not having standardized test results be a criteria for graduating.

The High School Graduation rate is in the high-80's as it is, so it's not like having a diploma NOW even proves anything. I guess it proves that a person is, at least, borderline intellectually functional. That's not to say that those without diplomas are not, but is rather just to say that having the H.S. Diploma already doesn't mean anything anyway.

Quote: Mission146

I don't see why you have to have a standardized measure for anything, or if you do, just have the standardized tests and (as Wizard proposed) makes the overall results for a school district public information. You can also use the standardized tests to identify problem areas.

Because if you do not measure results then what do the results mean? Performance gets measured in most places in life, why are schools and students exempt?

We are talking taking tests, which in school is no big deal. You start taking them in first grade and they never end. The problem seems to be that certain people want everyone to get the same score on the test. Or at least every school average to the same score. But some people do better than others, this is life.